Cover-gate
Plenty of people are weighing in on The New Yorker's satirical cover of the Obamas as terrorists.
My two cents: Timing, especially in comedy, is everything – and, in this case, the gag would have made much more sense back when the Obama-is-a-Muslim stuff was in full gear. By now the issue has died down, so if you don't like it, why re-inject it into the national debate?
Here's the quote from Obama spokesman Bill Burton: "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."
Check out this clip of CNN'sWolf Blitzer interviewing New Yorker editor David Remnick about the cover.
Plus a few quick takes from other pundits ...
GAWKER: "This is the problem with being an editor or publisher or writer or cartoonist or even blogger and having some small lingering trace of a sense of irony—sometimes you accidentally assume that the Vast and Mysterious "Audience" shares that subversive French sense."
Byron York, NATIONAL REVIEW: "Privately, some McCain types admit they find the cover funny. And how bad can it be for your campaign when a national magazine, in an effort to take a shot at Fox News and talk radio, portrays your opponent like this? Some of Obama's supporters are likely to go over the top in their defensive outrage, sending subtle reinforcements to viewers who already believe that McCain is stronger than Obama on the issue of terrorism. Maybe it's funny, and maybe it's tasteless and offensive — maybe all three — but it will be noticed."
Jake Tapper, ABC NEWS: "Intent factors into these matters, of course, but no Upper East Side liberal – no matter how superior they feel their intellect is – should assume that just because they're mocking such ridiculousness, the illustration won't feed into the same beast in emails and other media. It's a recruitment poster for the right-wing." (Click here to read Tapper's follow-up post, including Remnick's rebuttal.)
Andrew Sullivan, THE ATLANTIC: "I thought it was quite funny myself. This was obviously intended ironically, and it's not exactly Parade magazine."
Eve Fairbanks, THE NEW REPUBLIC: "This week's cover seems to me ultimately more dull than provocative – a collection of the most obvious smear narratives about Obama, lumped together and mediocrely illustrated. It's no better than Perry Bacon's infamous Washington Post story, "Foes Use Obama's Muslim Ties to Fuel Rumors About Him." Both outlets claimed not to support the allegations they were visually or rhetorically putting forward – obviously! – and yet a reader would have to have a fairly sophisticated understanding of each outlet's ethos to immediately intuit the intended ironic distance."
Michael Weiss, PAJAMASMEDIA: "Listening to the chorus of fainthearted responses to this week's New Yorker cover, one gets the impression that satire, like everything else in our sad culture, must now come with a warning label and child-safety latch."
Share
6 Comments
Barack Obama,
Presidential Race
Comments RSS Feed Reader Comments
For all those readers with the sophisticated tastes and level of education common to New Yorker patrons, the Obama cover may be seen as a spoof and not offensive.
To all those in airport shops and magazine stores who never read the New Yorker but just gaze at the cover on the news rack, it suggests an offensive and untrue picture of the Obamas that reinforces the false imagines that are being portrayed on the web by the right wing and believed or suspected by too many non-New Yorker reading Americans.
I find myself wondering. I am a Muslim and I am made fun off in an open stage. Regardless if it is Obama or anyone els, It seams like making fun of Muslims is the fashion these days. Well, I am a Muslim American and I am proud of my heritage and my history. I am sure a day will come and America will apologize to Muslims worldwide. A day will come where we Good American Muslims will be recognized as good citizen of this great country. Until then, I will have to put up with ignorance and good afternoon bigotry
I am Jewish and like Mr. El-Sherif I also am offended by including the Muslim aspect WHY? Was the New Yorker unable to come up with a better cover caricature. It is stupid beyond words. Mr.El-Sherif is really reacting like a gentleman although he should be offended. How fasr we forget what happened in Denmark?
Regardless of what Mr. El-sherif says, as long as any Muslim screams “Death to the non-believers!”, continues to be a suicide bomber, etc., they never will be recognized as good citizens of any country other than a Muslim one. It is the obligation of Muslims to prove their worth and peaceful contribution, not for America to apologize. The magazine cover lacked good taste and was unnecessary. Ignore it.
I find myself also wondering on comment by Mr. Ahmed El-Sherif. It is obvious that intention of discussed cover of The New Yorker was not “making fun of muslims” but bring to attention fact that main American political party brought as presidential candidate representative of minority by color and by his background and heritage, including religious. It is also reflected widespread grounded concern about unpredictability of his possible policies and decisions if he become a president. One good criteria for voters is that all enemies of America prefer him as president…
I also wondering what Mr. Ahmed and all other believer muslims doing in this country and how long he is staying there? While he proud of his heritage and history, he certainly should know that this is not un American herutage and history. That is because all what America had achieved and what muslims now use here belong to Judeo-Christian civilization and for muslims best environment to explore their believes are certaily their muslim countries (total of 23 if I am correct).
He also should know that lot of Americans see Islam as religion of intolerance, undemocratic and as of bigotry terrorists. Of course, on one hand, polite and human Americans would not apply this to any muslim but on other hand - how they supposed to know who is who? - Whether you arrived here because you were persecuted in your country and you are adhere to American values, or you arrived here to concur or undermine this “infidel” country to accomplish well known goal of your religion? Americans well aware about muslims in Brooklyn and else where celebrated and danced on September 11 and on occasion of other successful terrorist acts around the globe and how they support financially terrorist organizations back to their country. This is a infamous fifth column… Therefore, it is up to “american muslims” themself and to their imams to prove to American people their loyalty, good intensions and peacefulness. How about, for example, for beginning to issue fatwa denouncing terrorism, muslim terrorists by names, including suiside bombers barbaric human sucrifices, intention of Islam to concur the world, to convert humanity worldwide to their religion and to kill balance of non-compliant “infidels”? Open discussion about intention of Islam and muslims in democratic Judeo-Cristian countries and about democracy back to their native countries, and so on… Or return to your societies to wear headjabs.
Leave a Comment
To leave a comment, you must first be logged in to JTA. If you are not registered, please click here.
Already a JTA member?
Need to know? Get JTA's free e-newsletters!
Hersh Adlerstein
07/15/08 04:57 PM
When I was still in high school, back in 1943, in Canada, I began to read THE NEW YORKER and have continued for over 65 years to sometimes enjoy, occasionally lose my temper, and always read the magazine. I will still continue, at 82, to keep doing so, but I cannot understand the purpose of the cover, unless it was to stir up controversy. It has, and has given the magazine more publicity among those who had never heard of it before than any other issue, even the “Hasid & Black girlfriend” cover. Someone goofed, and the Obamas are owed an apology
.