Obama - New Yorker Cover

I think it's funny (4.00 / 2)

n/t

---

by: JimC @ Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 10:43:57 AM CDT

I laughed so hard I fell off my chair (4.00 / 2)

when I saw that cover.

What a perfect way to defeat ludricrous right-wing smears, by marginalizing it with satire.  The New Yorker consistently proves its worth as the only print media to enter my home, and it did not let me down again.

But, according to outraged legions of Obama supporters on dKos and elsewhere, I'm an elite Upper East sider who doesn't understand the reinforcing impact this will have on Joe Six-Pack low-info voter.

Oh, the irony!

Wonder if Sununu's fired now.

---

by: Dean Barker @ Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 13:22:04 PM CDT

This is why I thought it was noteworthy, (4.00 / 1)

just as a study in media effects. After I laughed, I began to think about this. The more I thought, the more I spun out the possible unintended consequences. The fact that so many of the Obama supporters took up the cry of the low-info Joes was what got my immediate attention. And in some parts of the blogoshpere, it seems that their fears were well-founded. I was a bit weirded-out myself after looking around for a few minutes.

But, it also served to get the mainstream McCain machine rushing to get on the record in condemnation, so it could make it a lot harder for any potential swiftboaters to get traction.

Lots of strange outcomes possible here, IMO.

Of course, chances are it will all be nothing but dust after a couple of news cycles.

And, thanks for the FP!


It's time for a change and I need a nap. Or is it the other way around?

---

by: GreyMike @ Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 14:12:06 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

It will be seen as a joke (4.00 / 1)

that landed flat. Too crypto if you have to go on T.V. to explain. It will be over emphasized and over analyzed, and next week the New Yorker will have a bump in their sales from people who liked it, for whatever reason. At least they take risks. Dean and GreyMike both have good points.


This is not a novel to be tossed aside lightly. It should be thrown with great force.

   Dorothy Parker

---

by: JonnyBBad @ Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 17:12:12 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Had they printed the "Politics of Fear" .... (0.00 / 0)

....related-article title somewhere into the drawing, the satire would have worked much better. Yet months from now, I doubt this will be recalled by many.

 By contrast, I thought that this New Yorker cover was spot-on.

 "We should pay attention to that man behind the curtain."

---

by: Ed Tracey @ Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 17:17:17 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I have so many old ones (0.00 / 0)

I may be burning them for heat this winter.
Except the 9/11 one. It is black. A classic in undestatement.
A subtlety this right wing satire had not.

This is not a novel to be tossed aside lightly. It should be thrown with great force.

   Dorothy Parker

---

by: JonnyBBad @ Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 17:41:33 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

irony deficiency (0.00 / 0)

Thanks Alex this is the best title of an article so far

http://www.latimes.com/news/pr...
The New Yorker magazine cover depicting Barack and Michelle Obama as a couple of gun-toting, flag-burning, America-hating terrorists has generated outrage among the presidential candidate's supporters.
ON THE MEDIA
Barack Obama magazine flap shows an irony deficiency

for the record 'fist bumpin' was nowhere to be found

This is not a novel to be tossed aside lightly. It should be thrown with great force.

   Dorothy Parker

---

by: JonnyBBad @ Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 19:25:21 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Joe Six-Pack low-info voters don't read The New Yorker. (0.00 / 0)

That said, the picture should have been accompanied by a large caption exemplifying the point.

---

by: Douglas E. Lindner @ Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 15:25:20 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Oh, please. (0.00 / 0)

The New Yorker doesn't work that way. They don't do snark tags.

---

by: elwood @ Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 16:04:44 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

They will now (0.00 / 0)

after all the press attention.

Waking up on November 5th with no regrets.

---

by: Kelly Nordstrom @ Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 16:25:13 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Nope. (0.00 / 0)

That hasn't been effective against a legitimate target, such as Fox or ABC. It won't change the New Yorker into Parade Magazine.

---

by: elwood @ Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 16:54:57 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

What I meant was, (4.00 / 1)

They don't read it typically, but now they will see the cover, in the MSM and will look it up online, etc... whereas in the past this kind of satire could be foisted on those who would understand it as such, without much public commentary.  Now, even those who aren't in the target audience see the message, whether they understand/appreciate it or not.

Waking up on November 5th with no regrets.

---

by: Kelly Nordstrom @ Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 17:16:08 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Bingo (4.00 / 1)

I just did a "Google News" search for "obama new yorker cover" and got 1,293 hits.  

http://news.google.com/news?q=...

Chances are, even low information voters are exposed to one of the publications, newscasts or websites that showed the cover (and, yes, I "got" the satire).    

---

by: cmnh @ Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 17:45:48 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I don't understand what the hoopla is (4.00 / 5)

over voters seeing it who normally don't read The New Yorker. There is no substantive mental difference between the two groups.

Does anyone seriously think potential swing voters are so stupid that this cartoon will make them jump into McCain's arms?

The comments expressed on some blog posts I've read (not here) show a profound lack of respect for the brains of the electorate.  Yet they are the same people who think it elitist of the New Yorker to have published the cartoon.

The only people who could conceivably take this not as parody are RW fringe who aren't reachable by any means.

I think the cartoon has far more power to do good through manifesting these smears openly - and thereby showing how, patently ludricrous they are - than it has the power to reinforce them.

Adding - not that a magazine cartoonist is under any obligation to do "good" or "bad" by the Obama campaign.

Wonder if Sununu's fired now.

---

by: Dean Barker @ Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 18:15:26 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

BTW, New Yorker covers (4.00 / 1)

typically have titles, listed at the bottom of the inside table of contents. The title of this cover was "The Politics of Fear."

---

by: elwood @ Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 16:57:05 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

And would it have killed them to print that on the cover? (0.00 / 0)

Reinforcement is big, even if it's not the intention.  I think this would be funny if it had what you call "snark tags."  A lot of people are trying to send the big lie subtly, so the New Yorker editors (who, I might add, are media professionals and know all of this) could be a little more careful to ensure that a glance at a newsstand doesn't send the wrong message.  It's not New Yorker subscribers I'm worried about.  It's the zeitgeist, and this needs to be forgotten.

By the way, I think turning this whole thing into an absurd caricature is a good idea, but should be done more carefully.

---

by: Douglas E. Lindner @ Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 21:38:51 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

It reinforced my view (4.00 / 2)

that - especially on DailyKos - there is an Obama cult in which not fully, vigorously, continuously supporting him is tantamount to being a tool of Karl Rove.

There was a similar cult for Edwards there earlier.

Issues such as FISA and free speech fall by the wayside.

---

by: elwood @ Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 16:08:29 PM CDT

Bravo (0.00 / 0)

Thank you for not saying 'here' too.

We love the New Yorker and will forgive it it's trespasses, yadda yadda yadda.

Dean, is your cell padded ? That musta hurt.


This is not a novel to be tossed aside lightly. It should be thrown with great force.

   Dorothy Parker

---

by: JonnyBBad @ Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 16:56:09 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

SATIRE (4.00 / 2)

I believe most people will take it for what it is! I did not find it all that funny but some will!
It will not even be news by Friday.

Stanley Devorin-Post

---

by: Stanley Devorin-Post @ Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 20:55:10 PM CDT

Stephen Colbert: (0.00 / 0)

Mr. Colbert said in a telephone interview that a running joke on his show has been that Mr. Obama is a "secret Muslim"; the New Yorker cover, he said, was consistent with that. "It's a completely valid satirical point to make - and it's perfectly valid for Obama not to like it," he said.

Wonder if Sununu's fired now.

---

by: Dean Barker @ Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 06:09:29 AM CDT

Colbert has something the New Yorker doesn't. (4.00 / 2)

You can't watch his show and hear him call Obama a secret Muslim without hearing his audience laugh.

---

by: Douglas E. Lindner @ Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 13:39:24 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Can it be that easy? (0.00 / 0)

Watch the frantic FISA-nistas drop the chip on their shoulders to rush to this shiny object.

Nothing gels the scores of do-gooders, then a greater good to do.

See New Yorker print. Hear pundits moan. Watch herd move.

The giant finds its gait.

---

by: Jack Mitchell @ Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 07:49:16 AM CDT

The score (4.00 / 6)

as observed so far (all present company excepted, natch):

Longtime New Yorker readers: (snicker) "Somebody will be offended."

Camp Obama: "How offensive!"

Camp McCain: "How offensive!"

Left wing yahoos: "See what we mean? It's just like we've been saying..."

Right wing yahoos: "See what we mean? It's just like we've been saying..."

Media, punditry, chinstrokers, etc.: "OMG! OMG! OMG!" (rushing in circles, shouting)

Thomas Nast: "Whizzzzzzzzzz!" (spinning in grave like a lathe)

Most of the electorate: "What's the New Yorker?"

Prediction: totally stale by Friday.

It's time for a change and I need a nap. Or is it the other way around?

---

by: GreyMike @ Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 10:07:32 AM CDT

This "satire" fell short...well short (0.00 / 0)

Those who say that use of this illustration as a magazine cover is brilliant satire are wrong.

For satire to work, it needs to be unambiguous so that it cannot be interpreted to support more than a single conclusion.  With a casual glance at this magazine cover (and let's face it: that's all that most people who view the cover will give it) this illustration easily can be misunderstood to "confirm" and continue the spread of the lies so depicted. If you don't think that's true, think about whether you would be surprised by a Faux News story that did exactly that.

Lies are perpetuated not just by those miscreants who wish them to be accepted as truth, but also by those who repeat the lies innocently or even in efforts to dispel them. Each repetition makes the lie sound more familiar and, psychologists tell us, easier to believe.  Now think about the intelligence of the average American. And then think about the fact that, by definition, half of all Americans are less intelligent than that.  Yet those Americans all are potential voters.  

The admixture of low-info Joes' satisfaction with sound bites (in this case, cover art) to inform them and the oft-repeated lies depicted on the cover likely will, for many, have exactly the opposite effect that Blitt and Remnick said they intended.

---

by: NuzzyLeansLeft @ Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 12:15:20 PM CDT

Contextless critiques (4.00 / 2)

New Yorker covers are almost always ambiguous.

And the notion that satire must be unambiguous would perhaps be disputed by Jonathan Swift - or Randy Newman, for that matter.

"Most people who view this magazine" are New Yorker subscribers. They know the context. People who see it on MSNBC or on a web site will hear the context.

---

by: elwood @ Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 12:19:28 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

A Modest Proposal (0.00 / 0)

Swift indeed

snip snip chew chew

http://art-bin.com/art/omodest...
A Modest Proposal

For Preventing The Children of Poor People in Ireland
From Being Aburden to Their Parents or Country, and
For Making Them Beneficial to The Public

By Jonathan Swift (1729)

"I have been assured by a very knowing American of my acquaintance in London, that a young healthy child well nursed is at a year old a most delicious, nourishing, and wholesome food, whether stewed, roasted, baked, or boiled ..."

As to my own part, having turned my thoughts for many years upon this important subject, and maturely weighed the several schemes of other projectors, I have always found them grossly mistaken in the computation. It is true, a child just dropped from its dam may be supported by her milk for a solar year, with little other nourishment; at most not above the value of 2s., which the mother may certainly get, or the value in scraps, by her lawful occupation of begging; and it is exactly at one year old that I propose to provide for them in such a manner as instead of being a charge upon their parents or the parish, or wanting food and raiment for the rest of their lives, they shall on the contrary contribute to the feeding, and partly to the clothing, of many thousands.

This is not a novel to be tossed aside lightly. It should be thrown with great force.

   Dorothy Parker

---

by: JonnyBBad @ Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 16:56:49 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Keep feeding that stereotype (4.00 / 2)

Now think about the intelligence of the average American. And then think about the fact that, by definition, half of all Americans are less intelligent than that.  Yet those Americans all are potential voters.

I want to make sure every American who happens to read Blue Hampshire is convinced we are elitists who hate them.

Do you detect any ambiguity in this comment?

---

by: JimC @ Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 12:28:29 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Quick! To the nearest starbucks! (4.00 / 1)

I need a soy latte.

---

by: Douglas E. Lindner @ Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 13:43:29 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Will that be Grande or Venti? n/t (0.00 / 0)

It's time for a change and I need a nap. Or is it the other way around?

---

by: GreyMike @ Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 14:36:46 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Whichever one is less affordable for real people. (0.00 / 0)

---

by: Douglas E. Lindner @ Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 15:34:16 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

F*ck that (0.00 / 0)

they only carry highly sweetened soy...which is as bad for you as the milk it replces...now Dirt Cowboy, they got soy, I had one there today.\
"Friends don't let friends drink Starbucks"

This is not a novel to be tossed aside lightly. It should be thrown with great force.

   Dorothy Parker

---

by: JonnyBBad @ Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 16:58:56 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

My drink of choice is water from my elitist SIGG bottle. (0.00 / 0)

---

by: Douglas E. Lindner @ Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 19:01:32 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

we print their names on them ! n/t (0.00 / 0)

This is not a novel to be tossed aside lightly. It should be thrown with great force.

   Dorothy Parker

---

by: JonnyBBad @ Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 19:10:19 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

? (0.00 / 0)

---

by: Douglas E. Lindner @ Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 22:20:21 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

the company I work for (0.00 / 0)

Bovie Screen print in Bow !
We print on stuff.

This is not a novel to be tossed aside lightly. It should be thrown with great force.

   Dorothy Parker

---

by: JonnyBBad @ Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 05:48:18 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Yes but whose name do you print? (0.00 / 0)

---

by: Douglas E. Lindner @ Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 15:40:23 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Sigg n/t (0.00 / 0)

This is not a novel to be tossed aside lightly. It should be thrown with great force.

   Dorothy Parker

---

by: JonnyBBad @ Thu Jul 17, 2008 at 14:32:40 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Ah. (4.00 / 1)

Glad to know they're working with local companies.

---

by: Douglas E. Lindner @ Thu Jul 17, 2008 at 15:57:53 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Since when (0.00 / 0)

is milk bad for you?

---

by: Alex Gallichon @ Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 19:35:57 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

since when you are (0.00 / 0)

old...fat fat fat. is bad bad bad
I had a neighbor growing up, a Dr. named Kurt Oster who held that Homogenating milk caused a lot more arteriosclerosis cases since the advent of the super mixing.

http://www.westonaprice.org/kn...
 

This is not a novel to be tossed aside lightly. It should be thrown with great force.

   Dorothy Parker

---

by: JonnyBBad @ Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 19:50:20 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

The perfect food (0.00 / 0)

for baby cows...

Hope > Fear

---

by: Mike Hoefer @ Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 21:14:48 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Stevenson in 56 (4.00 / 4)

It is said that when an enthusiastic supporter exclaimed to the presidential candidate, "Oh all thinking Americans will vote for you!" He responded, "Well that's great, but I need a majority."

My hope is that by the fall, everyone, Joe Six Pack included, will have seen how ridiculous is the pattern of smears by the Republicans that the New Yorker cover satirized. In any political race, it's wise to say what the other guy is going to say about you before they say it. Inoculation.  Let's hope it works that way!

---

by: Burt Cohen @ Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 19:18:50 PM CDT

New Yorker covers (4.00 / 3)

One of the many, many misinformed things going on in the media discussion is the notion that this - or other - New Yorker covers are supposed to be "funny."

A lot of the cartoons inside are laugh-out-loud funny. But the covers, when they go for humor at all, are much more likely to elicit (at least from me) a reaction of: "??? What's that? Ohhhh... I get what [s]he means...Heh."

---

by: elwood @ Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 20:09:39 PM CDT

Not for Dubuque (4.00 / 2)

Something was gnawing at me about this and I realized it was Harold Ross' defiant words that "The New Yorker is not for the little old lady in Dubuque." Elitist? Certainly. His original prospectus for the magazine here.

---

by: elwood @ Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 07:38:20 AM CDT

I knew none of this (4.00 / 2)

when I first discovered the magazine sometime around age 12 or 13. My enterprising grandfather had a few well-heeled neighbors whose trash he took to the dump (in those days it was the dump) along with his own, for which he made a couple of extra dollars per stop (that likely turned up in the weekly poker game).

This ritual also included the removal of recent magazines, some of which detoured back to his house for a time before they went to their final resting place, and after I discovered them, the New Yorkers began to come home with me. I loved the fiction, (Updike, Cheever, Mary McCarthy, etc.) as well as the cartoons (Addams in particular), but was mostly fascinated by the glimpse of a world totally foreign to a country bumpkin such as myself. I was obviously not meant to be reading this, but there I was.

Well, I may still be in the servant class, but at least I buy my own now (although I am not beyond occasional dump-picking in other categories). Now that I am in the AARP demographic, I enjoy Hertzberg, Surowiecki, Gopnik, and Auletta in particular (and Updike still!), along with the other contributors.

Elitist? Well I suppose so, but I really don't care. I just happen to like reading well-crafted long form pieces of a sort that is increasingly difficult to find.

Elwood is spot on about the cryptic nature of the covers; I would characterize many of them as largely "inside" humor, meant to lampoon persons or situations in an ironic/sardonic vein (Spitzer in shorts, etc.).

It's time for a change and I need a nap. Or is it the other way around?

---

by: GreyMike @ Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 08:58:53 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Great find (4.00 / 1)

I think that quote needs more context (emphasis mine).

THE NEW YORKER will be the magazine which is not edited for the old lady in Dubuque. It will not be concerned in what she is thinking about. This is not meant in disrespect, but THE NEW YORKER is a magazine avowedly published for a metropolitan audience and thereby will escape an influence which hampers most national publications. It expects a considerable national circulation, but this will come from persons who have a metropolitan interest.

ALL magazines have world views; I think Ross is acknowledging that The New Yorker's take on things is just as valid as (at the time) the Saturday Evening Post or Life.

But I'm biased, because I love the New Yorker, for the reasons GreyMike lists.

---

by: JimC @ Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 09:51:03 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Is it elitist? Who cares? (0.00 / 0)

The beauty of this country is that we don't all have to like the same things and be part of the same subcultures to respect each other.

The New Yorker is geared toward intellectual types.  Not everything has to be about vertical class distinctions in which some people are thought to be, or assumed to think they are, better than others.

That said, an inside joke open to everyone needs context if it's something so potentially misleading about something so important.

As has been suggested, would it have killed them to have someone like Rush Limbaugh painting the picture, or even a caption?

---

by: Douglas E. Lindner @ Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 16:00:46 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

The eyes have it (0.00 / 0)

Her eyes have a "you best not screw this up, it's on you" look.

His eyes say "can you believe this shit?" Not so much in direct response to her, but maybe as if he sees he has to do it, in spite of the ridiculous "costume" he has been dressed up in.

Anyone else care to play pop psychobabblist?

The giant finds its gait.

---

by: Jack Mitchell @ Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 11:02:42 AM CDT

Later that week... (0.00 / 0)

All reports from the "fly-over" zone of Middle America agree: people get it. Not just the New York "elite." Mitchell is right to note the candidate's eyes, they say it all.
It ain't gonna hurt. I predict as the general rolls around, images like this will have inoculated most voters against the Republican garbage; it will be so obvious.

---

by: Burt Cohen @ Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 11:32:04 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Isn't that exactly her pose, down to the face angle and eyes, when (0.00 / 0)

doing the "terrorist fist jab" at the moment that he had secured the nomination?

Wonder if Sununu's fired now.

---

by: Dean Barker @ Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 19:07:14 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

My copy of the controversial (4.00 / 1)

New Yorker edition came in the mail today.

For all the talk about the cover, the piece I look forward to reading is, "Making It: How Chicago Shaped Obama," by Ryan Lizza, which, from having just skimmed through it, looks like a much more original and comprehensive piece on Obama's political ascent than any I've seen before it.

---

by: Alex Gallichon @ Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 17:39:12 PM CDT