Jul 14 2008
Magazine cover offensive?
I don’t know… I found it rather amusing myself. But then I don’t live in Podunk, Kansas and I certainly don’t believe all the wild rumors the righties love to spread about.
Obama campaign calls New Yorker cover offensive
(CNN) — Sen. Barack Obama’s campaign has sharply criticized The New Yorker magazine over the publication’s latest cover illustration, which appears to portray the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee and his wife as terrorist enemies of the United States.
The cover, published Sunday, shows Obama in the Oval Office dressed in traditional Muslim attire. His wife, Michelle, wears an Afro hairstyle and has a machine gun slung over her back. An American flag can be seen burning in the fireplace, and a picture of Osama bin Laden hangs on the wall.
“The New Yorker may think, as one of their staff explained to us, that their cover is a satirical lampoon of the caricature Sen. Obama’s right-wing critics have tried to create,” Obama spokesman Bill Burton said in a statement. “But most readers will see it as tasteless and offensive. And we agree.”
Sen. John McCain’s campaign spokesman Tucker Bounds said he agreed with Burton’s sentiment.
Obama refused to comment on the illustration Sunday.
The cover is linked to a feature article about the senator from Illinois’ formative political years in Chicago.
But not everyone finds the illustration over the top.
Chicago Tribune columnist Clarence Page told CNN’s “Reliable Sources” on Sunday that the cover “is just lampooning all the crazy ignorance out there.”
“I remember a few years ago, when The New Yorker had a cover at a time of great black-Jewish tension in New York. You had a cartoon of an obvious Orthodox Jewish male kissing a black woman, and this created a lot of buzz,” Page said. “That’s what it is, buzz. It’s discussion. It’s talk. And that’s what covers are supposed to do.”
Liberal radio talk-show host Laura Flanders told CNN’s “American Morning” on Monday, “I think the Obama campaign made a misstep here. They should have come out strongly endorsing this cover.
She said, “This isn’t a jab at them, terrorist or any other kind. This is a jab at the media. … It should be cause for our conversation to focus on the kind of fear mongering that the media and people on the right have engaged in.”
I’m kind of in the camp that says this is no big deal. Most people are going to recognize the cover for what it is – a jab at the conservative media and the right wing pundits and talking heads who spread this kind of garbage. The people who take the cover at face value were never going to vote for Senator Obama, anyway.
Then again, it is still early in the campaign. Many people are just now beginning to pay attention. (Most will likely not start paying attention until after the conventions.) Something like this may just serve to propagate the story line being put forth by the conservative media and the right wing pundits and talking heads.
I have no doubt that a lot of wingers will be buying lots of extra copies of the magazine just so they can rip off the covers and pass them around. “See? Even a liberal rag like The New Yorker thinks that Obama and his wife are terrorists.”
What do you think about the cover?
UPDATE: Barry Blitt, the cartoonist who drew the cover, explains his work:
I think the idea that the Obamas are branded as unpatriotic [let alone as terrorists] in certain sectors is preposterous. It seemed to me that depicting the concept would show it as the fear-mongering ridiculousness that it is.
UPDATE #2: The more I think about it and the more I look at this cover, the more I am convinced that it really is not all that funny. I understand its message, as will most everybody who is at all familiar with The New Yorker. The problem is that not everybody is familiar with the magazine. A lot of people are going to pass newsstands, see this cover and interpret it in just the way the rabid right wants them to interpret it. There is no text on the cover and there is no article in the magazine to explain its meaning. It is just left hanging. And it is not really all that funny.
11 Responses to “Magazine cover offensive?”
I don’t think that this is a big deal, because I’m pretty sure if it had John McCain looking frail and old, or something about John McCain then everyone would be laughing and pushing it off as not being a big deal. I just think that some people just didn’t get it, and shouted out “Hey what are you doing?”.
But I can see where those people are coming from, especially if they were just looking through a magazine rack and just seen the picture.
I think that with 25% of american voters thinking is has been brought up as a muslim and 10% believing he would be swore in with the Qu’ran…. this is a particularly stupid cover…
Well it is their magazine. If they want to write that, it is their business.
I think the campaign has more to worry about than a magazine cover. I agree with your assessment that most people are now just starting to pay attention.
You see now what is in for Thes United States of America. A man that won’t stand at atention when the American Anthem is played, A man that won’t wear the Ametican flar lapel pin……
The future of United States of America is at risk this November. This is a man that wants to change the National Anthem and doesn’t wear the lapel flag because it offends others. I don’t know of any true American it offends. And I’m sure it doesn’t offend the American soldiers fighting the Taliban (the ones that are offended by the American Flag) Nor any other pulbic office holder.
@Bill and John: You’re really the same person, aren’t you?
At least “John” got one thing right – the future of the United States of America really is at risk this November.
Everything else, sorry… wrong. (To what, pray tell, does Sen. Obama want to change the national anthem? That is one right wing talking point that I will admit to not having heard before. Also, where on earth did you get that nonsense about him not wearing a flag pin on his lapel because it offends others? Really, where do you people get this stuff?)
And “Bill” … take a moment next time and proofread what you type, please. This site even gives you an opportunity to edit your comment after you submit it. Use it. Thanks.
Agreed Len, I usually am around more conservative type of information just because I usually agree with it more, but there are a lot of people ignorant on Obama, on both sides, but the Republican side is more on his beliefs – like the above comments about the national anthem and such, as too haven’t heard this yet. It is probably just one of those e-mail rumors.
I generally think it really isn’t that big a deal and I don’t think the Obama campaign is really pushing the story–it is definitely a media-driven issue.
That said, it does reinforce the lies for the idiots who want to believe this crap. Of course, those people wouldn’t have voted for Obama in the first place and I doubt anyone who could be convinced of these lies would either, so the damage probably is minimal.
As the famous quote goes:
“Beauty lies on the eyes of the beholder”
Enough said I suppose
Personally, I think you’re crediting some people with too much intelligence… I only last week left a comment somewhere on a blog that thought Obama was a Muslim. For real. I mean, he has a pastor, somewhat newsworthy controversy, but somehow that also still makes him Muslim?
Honestly.. I don’t think this Nation is entirely ready for such satire yet. I hate to say it.