Ok, I'll add my voice to one of the choirs about the cover the July 21st New Yorker magazine with Barack and Michelle Obama. And it's not new or unique, simply mine. I think this cartoon in the Washington Post kinda' sums it up fairly well.
I find the cover totally offensive and the New Yorker owes the Obama's an apology for the distaste of the cover on the cover too. It's not about satire. I read many of the editorials and blogs and listened to many of the political pundits, and my impression is that most are over analyzing the purpose, goal or meaning of the cover. It was to make a statement which can have many interpretations, of which only the artist and the editorial management of the New Yorker knows for sure.
But to me, they missed whatever that mark was and it's beyond the point of being funny or political satire. It's simply crude and cruel. It plays to the false information that the many conservatives and religious right are pushing about the Obama's, which are all misleading at best and lies at worst. And even when faced with the facts, they continue to portray Obama with their same rhetoric.
I would ask the New Yorker if they think it is funny or satire, how about one about John McCain? Or does the magazine have the balls to do that? Satirize McCain in the extreme? What's the adage about what is good for the goose is good for the gander? Will you do that or are you afraid of or in the pocket of the Republicans? You can sell fear in the page of satire of a race or etchnic group but not stand up to it from others, like rich, politically powerful, white men?
As you can tell, I'm anger about the cover. It's over the line of acceptable behavior for a magazine of your quality. And while I have bought and read the New Yorker occasionally, I'll reconsider more in the future if I want my money to pay for this attitude by the editorial management about selected political leaders or some racial or ethnic groups.
No comments:
Post a Comment