Spinning the Spin on Barack Obama

Submitted by Anne Landman on

Obama New YorkerThe cover of the upcoming issue of the New Yorker magazine bears a satirical cartoon that incorporates practically every jab the right wing has taken at Barack Obama and his wife Michelle: the couple is pictured standing in the White House Oval Office dressed in Muslim garb. Barack is wearing a turban, Michelle has an "Angela Davis"-type afro hairdo and is shown toting a machine gun. An American flag burns in the fireplace as the couple engages in a "terrorist fist-bump." A portrait of Osama bin Laden hangs over the fireplace. The cover is titled, "The Politics of Fear." Both presidential campaigns quickly condemned the lampooning cover as "tasteless and offensive." Jeffrey Goldberg, a blogger at the Atlantic.com laments the whole situation as "the death of humor."

Main Source: 
The Boston Globe (Boston.com), July 14, 2008
Topics: 
Left Wing
Right Wing
Crisis Management
Journalism
Election 2008
Terrorism
Democracy
Education
Ethics
Politics
Public Relations
Race / Ethnic Issues
Religion

Comments

lisast replied on

After thinking about this all day, the cover was not only disgusting, it was, in my opinion, blatantly racist. This election needs an intelligent discussion of the serious issues, not another week of media spin on this cover. I think the issue should be pulled from all retail and library shelves and returned to Conde Nast. Remnick should be fired. If I were an advertiser with The New Yorker, they would no longer have my business. The cover was not funny and it was not satirical.

Mutternich replied on

Looks to me like it satirized racism. (They forgot the bomb in Obama's turban, though.)

This election needs an intelligent discussion of the serious issues, not another week of media spin on this cover.

Fine, I promise not to post any more comments on it after Wednesday.

mikwatch replied on

The New Yorker loves its satire.
For those who interpret this cover as disgusting racism, take a pause and untwist your panties. Have you considered that the cover is a representation of how a percentage of Americans perceive the Obamas? hmm.

bass replied on

Have you considered that the cover is a representation of how a percentage of Americans perceive the Obamas?

Some will see this as a confirmation of their suspicions, not as satire. Of course, those people were not likely to vote for Obama anyway, but now they'll have what they think is a legitimate reason.

mikwatch replied on

Some will see this as a confirmation of their suspicions, not as satire.

What seems so clear to me is cloudy to others. Sigh.

efnx replied on

Lighten up. This cover is hilarious. It's making fun of all the people that have blatantly mislabeled and pigeon-holed the Obamas. Screw both the parties condemnation, a political party itself has no sense of humor, just the individual people within it, and I bet there were people from both sides laughing at this like I am.

doriandale replied on

There is no moral or immoral art, Oscar Wilde said, only good and bad art. Though mediocre, the Obamanable cover it's selling mags for Condi Nasti.

stephane mot replied on

The New Yorker supported Kerry a much straighter way 4 years ago.

This would be satire if there were some distance to it. Like O'Reilly holding this cover and saying "while we're at it why not add a suicide belt for Michelle ?"

The editor's answers don't hold a second :

"Satire is part of what we do, and it is meant to bring things out into the open, to hold up a mirror to prejudice, the hateful, and the absurd. And that's the spirit of this cover." The editor noted that the magazine includes two "very serious" articles about Obama -- a commentary and a 15,000-word reporting piece on the candidate's political education and rise in Chicago. (see AFP)

Seriously, everybody knows the power of image. The impact of one caricature relayed everywhere is ten billion times stronger than 15,000 words only a few will go through.

And regarding the people holding this "mirror" : I'm not a constant New Yorker reader but if I were I don't know how I'd take it.

Letters to the editor are probably going to outscore 15,000 words...

______________________________________________________________________________________
Stephane MOT -
blogules and other Weapons of Mass Disinformation

_____________________________________________

rhosa replied on

This is so funny---reminds me of that lynching prank in Jena, La, and its copycats. Or Sean Bell being bulleted to death on his wedding eve. What sort of weird bubble do the New Yorker editors and their defenders live in? Every Black person in this country carries the burden of chattel slavery, Jim Crow, lynchings, segregation, poverty, imprisonment and every other insult the US has come up with to inflict on a people. And now Arabs and Islam has been added to the burden.

But hey, lets 'lighten up'. And if some of us great unwashed take offense reading this as an open invitation to more of the above, those of you that think this is satire, (space for your smug grin here) please promise to see to it that the next overt violence against Blacks or Arabs gets stopped at the pass.

Mutternich replied on

"Makes everybody laugh" is not the definition of satire. It's not not satire just because you don't like it. George Bush didn't even smile when he shook hands with Stephen Colbert. You might think it's bad satire, you might think it's not satire at all, but satire is what it is.