This week's satirical New Yorker magazine cover showing Barack Obama dressed as a Muslim and Michelle dressed as a terrorist has been called "tasteless and offensive," by the Obama campaign.
The illustration hits newsstands today and shows Obama wearing traditional Muslim garb and his wife dressed in camouflage, combat boots and an assault rifle strapped over her shoulder, standing in the Oval Office doing the "terrorist fist-bump" in front of a mantle-top portrait of Osama bin Laden, next to a burning flag. No stone unslammed, it seems.
The Obama camp statement says:
The New Yorker may think, as one of their staff explained to us, that their cover is a satirical lampoon of the caricature Senator Obama's right-wing critics have tried to create. But most readers will see it as tasteless and offensive. And we agree.
The magazine, however, said the cover:
Combines a number of fantastical images about the Obamas and shows them for the obvious distortions they are. The burning flag, the nationalist-radical and Islamic outfits, the fist-bump, the portrait on the wall? All of them echo one attack or another. 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.
No word yet on apologies for the rest of the New Yorker cartoons. Who's side do you see — is this pointed satire, or tasteless and offensive?
Dries Van Noten
Celestina
Givenchy
Oh for pete's sake. Was this really necessary? The New Yorker KNEW this would piss everyone off, so why do it? Oh....right....to sell magazines.
1WTF?
2I understand the sattire, but this is really pushing it.
Especially when, a Newsweek poll released last Friday showed that 12 percent of those polled believed Obama was sworn in as a U.S. senator on a Quran, and 26 percent believed that he was raised as a Muslim. (Neither of which is true).
3This might have been OK on the inside of the magazine.
4I find it odd that all of the articles I've read lately in the New Yorker about Obama are so glaringly positive and love-fest like that they are the publication who printed this.
5No matter how pithy or sophisticated the staff and readership of the New Yorker may be, the satire will be lost on the very citizens who may be inclined to question Obama's faith while giving credence to the prejudice view that a Muslim should not be president.
The New Yorker is preaching to the choir, while the rest only have their worst suspicions confirmed.
6This is totally unacceptable. It wasn't satire. It was meant to remind people what the evil "right wing conspiracy" wants everyone to think. Just because it isn't true is of no matter. This is another example of someone trying to hard to be witty. Go back to the copy room and come up with something that benefits the masses.
7I personally think the satire is amusing and right-on, but I am concerned about what NYFashionista mentioned. There are still unfortunately quite a few people who still hang on tightly to the disproven Muslim smears against Obama, and these are probably the same people without the brains to recognize satire, so this might just fuel the flames. At the same time, though, I don't think the New Yorker really needs to feel responsible for the ignorant misconceptions of the lowest common denominator.
8Well said Eilonwy.
9What worse, visual imagery is far more visceral and immediate in its impact than written text. Even if the publication included articles championing Obama and poking fun at those who would defile him as terrorist/Muslim, they will not nearly have the same effet (if any) on the general population of the United States.
10Tasteless and Offensive.
11I understand satire...to a point. This just lends to the perception of negative connotations given to Obama. This picture should never have been made public. For those that only look at pictures and don't read/research, this image will tell them false information which will affect the campaign and election. Sad.
thanks Libertysugar
I've been reading the New Yorker for *years* now, since the age
of twelve; and they truly should have been more cautious and sensitive to the tenuous position Obama currently finds himself vis-a-vis the broader and predominantly specious perception of his
person and candidacy held by the American people.
12i think its pretty brilliant. it does show how ridiculous all of the right wing "osama-obama", and michelle saying "whitey", crap really is. unfortunately most people are too stupid to get it, or have no sense of humor, and so it will most likely be taken the wrong way by people who are already thinking these things.
13Good points all around! I especially agree with Eilonwy, NYFashionista and Harmony. I think it would be different if they would have had some text on the cover to clarify their point.
From Yahoo:
14McCain spokesman Tucker Bounds quickly e-mailed: “We completely agree with the Obama campaign, it’s tasteless and offensive."
Wow. This just goes to show that the word "terrorist" should never, ever, EVER have been uttered in reference to a fist bump. I think it's stupid, personally.
15YY- its not just "right wing" rumors, and as a matter of fact, it was a democrat (Hillary) supporter/blogger who started the "whitey" rumor
I think the New Yorker took this too far. And it really does give the small group who actually believes this stuff more justification
16Now that I think about it however, maybe this will end up as a favor to Obama BUT ONLY IF this story gets BIG enough. Obama will have to face it and dispel all the rumors once and for all (giving him a reason to address all the phony rumors).
17For example, he never cut his ties with J. Wright until he went off on a complete tangent (the second time in the spring) where Obama was forced to finally address the situation and was finally able to denounce and completely cut ties with Wright.
But only if this really became a HUGE issue. If not, it will just hurt Obama, and addressing/defending would be seen unnecessary
whether or not the rumors were started by the right wing, they are going to use them now... trust me. its satire. the new yorker does this sort of thing all the time. it takes a little critical thinking to see it for what it is and just not have a fit right away (something we have become really good at)... but i see no problem with this.
18yy, what is bad is that people aren't big fans of critical thinking nowadays, IMO...makes me sound elitist but I'm sorry, it's true.
19Very true, em1282.
20...and yy that comment wasn't meant to talk down to you and imply that you don't know that, I'm sorry if it comes off as that way!!
21i totally agree - thats the point i was trying to make too... people are too stupid to get things like this. they dont think, they just react... on both sides.
22sad.
I think this was a poor attempt at satire, and the New Yorker did it solely to be provocative. (And look, everyone is talking about it!) It's a pretty hurtful cartoon, especially because it plays on stereotypes of blackness. It's exasperating!
I was glad to see the McCain campaign's response; it was honorable (and politically savvy) of them to denounce the cover art.
23In light of the context of the article this is a perfect illustration in my opinion. As for the Obama campaign in their mellow dramatic effort to distinguish themselves from the illustration and making the illustration (THE) focal point they completely drew every one's attention to a negative perspective rather than ceasing an opportunity for an enlightening discussion on the use of manipulating peoples fears in American politics. What I would have done is forget the illustration study the article and use it to my advantage to educate the American public to that point.
Now all we're left with from the experience is a bunch of disgusted people who really haven’t learned much.
24I'm not American so I haven't be following the election super close, so this cover was lost on me...
25I get the satire, but I picked "tasteless and offensive" - and Eilowny really framed the issue exactly as I see it (well put!!)
26"Obama will have to face it and dispel all the rumors once and for all (giving him a reason to address all the phony rumors)."
Obama's got a website to address the rumors that stupid people can't seem to get enough of.
27Here, here Eilowny! You've said everything I was thinking!
28It's depressing that the people who already support Obama are the ones who will probably read the accompanying (sp?) articles, while the anti-Obama-ists will cling to this drawing, satire or not.
29Wow! The racist scare tactic! This is how America portray its successful black citizens! Satire- The exaggeration of essential points...there is no truth in this image!
30Fo show, I don't think this satire is meant to exaggerate the truth about Obama, but rather the truth about the ignorant, racist, and misguided smears against him, and the people who perpetuate or buy into the smears.
31"Obama will have to face it and dispel all the rumors once and for all (giving him a reason to address all the phony rumors)."
"Obama's got a website to address the rumors that stupid people can't seem to get enough of."
But what difference does it make whether Obama was raised a Muslim or a Jew or a Catholic or agnostic? Him debunking all the rumours that he wasn't raised WASP just feeds into the racism and suspicion that Muslim people are faced with today.
32thanks fauxtographic and kittyink
33I'm offended by the broad generalization that "the anti-Obama-ists will cling to this drawing." Many, many people who don't support Obama put absolutely no stake in the silly rumors about him.
As for the drawing, the New Yorker wanted to stir the pot and they did.
34The New Yorker is missing the mark on satire because they are trying to satire the fear mongering and out of control rumors that parts of our society are latching onto, but showing only an exaggerated portrait as if they were true. If they were set on this picture how about a caption like "Lies about Obama creating false image."
To truly be a satire the image would have to focus on society itself with wit or irony. The focus of the satire would have to be the media spreading the rumors, not the subject of them.
35My point exactly Jude C! The media is starting yet another racial conflict to get attention. Controversy makes money, honey..and this is what America is telling the rest of the world about us! Along with the other magnitude of lies.
36I think it's totally counter-productive, and not funny. The satire is not obvious. I would like to read the content of the article to get a better idea of WHAT they were thinkng when they printed this.
I agree with liberty, that an inside cartoon (not on the cover) would have been more appropriate, especially considering the misunderstandings and misinformation regarding Obama's religion. I think it's irresponsible.
37stephley- I know he has a website, but not everyone visits it. When J. Wright went out publicly to the media, Obama was forced to address him because it got to out of hand and made many skeptical. Therefore, he had a big speech about it and it was shown on every news channel (so he was able to reach a broad audience).
38IF this gets out of hand and made a huge deal like the Wright controversy, it would give Obama a reason to address these rumors publicly, once again making a big speech and explaining the "fallacies."
all I'm saying is that this has potential to be a "blessing in disguise" for him if things go accordingly
39
40Nothing about the cover was even mentioned inside the magazine! How could they even print something like that without an explanation.
41I dont get it? i honestly dont understand the point of this pic...and like fo show said it doesnt even give an explantion!!
42As an elite East Coast a-hole, even I am disappointed at this pseudo-satirical pandering of a pan-inflammatory caricature.
43just stupid i thought people had grown past this stupidness
44This definitely hurts his campaign, because ignorant people will look at this and see him as a terrorist. Not appropriate at all, shame on you New Yorker.
45I totally agree with Eilonwy (post #6)
46Anybody remember the cartoon of Condoleezza Rice giving birth to a monkey. This Obama picture is just as bad.
47I don't know what to say. I find everyone's take interesting but I was just on some political boards and I could just read the first three lines and knew what the whole post would say. Sometimes satire is really lost on some people... some people just focus on the picture (and not the big picture).
Check it out: http://rmhowle.newsvine.com/_news/2008/07/14/1664242-new-yorker-obama-co...
48Oh jeeze bella...I looked at it for about 30 seconds and couldn't stomach anymore. I have to say that I am so glad that it isn't like that (for the most part) on citizen.
49I didn't get it at first. I was thinking are they saying he's a terrorist? But I didn't buy into it either. I do think it's in very poor taste even for satire.
50Post New Comment
Please share your opinion with our community, but make sure it is on topic and follows our Community Rules. We moderate comments and prohibit personal attacks, threats, spam, lewd images, or the promotion of your personal website.