July 16th at 6:30AM
Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert Weigh in on the Provocative Cover From a Smarty-Pants Magazine
Like a lot of people, Jon gets his news from the Daily Show and cartoons, so it's understandable that a political firestorm erupted over the New Yorker cover with Barack Obama as a Muslim extremist.
And Stephen Colbert points out that the cover is actually quite funny... because it's true.
Should Barack Obama be outraged over a cartoon or can the media just let it go?
Ask
backflip
blinklist
BlogBookmark
Bloglines
BlogMarks
Blogsvine
BUMPzee!
CiteULike
co.mments
Connotea
del.icio.us
DotNetKicks
Digg
diigo
dropjack.com
dzone
Facebook
Fark
Faves
Feed Me Links
Friendsite
folkd.com
Furl
Google
Hugg
Jeqq
Kaboodle
linkaGoGo
LinksMarker
Ma.gnolia
Mister Wong
Mixx
MySpace
MyWeb
Netvouz
Newsvine
PlugIM
popcurrent
Propeller
Reddit
Rojo
Segnalo
Shoutwire
Simpy
sk*rt
Slashdot
Sphere
Sphinn
Spurl.net
Squidoo
StumbleUpon
Technorati
ThisNext
Webride
Windows Live
Yahoo!
Email This to a Friend
If you like this then please subscribe to the
PERMALINK:
RSS
It IS satire. What you are missing as that you are looking at every image separately. The whole thing as a unit is satire. it is satirical in the fact that it puts together some overly offensive images in such a fantastical way. The fist bump is key to all of this with the E.D. Hill "terrorist fist jab" thing to be kept in context. Think about it. The New Yorker seems to be indicating that they are actually a bunch of fist-bumping flag burning terrorists. It's funny because it's so absurd!
I think its okay, but it is missing the rest of congress and executive branch, and there should be a small figure representing a citizen like a where's waldo cartoon.
At least Stewart & Colbert didn't jump on the cartoon controversy bandwagon.
I thought Stewart's clip was great and the message was clear; stop attacking the first amendment and pay attention to the far more prevalent and critical problems arising (financial institutions, inflation, iraq, ad nauseum)
My mother-in-law told me the New Yorker cover reminded her of the anti-Semitic cartoons that were published in Germany before she had to leave Austria.
Sometimes a cartoon is just a cartoon, but sometimes they convey and help spread ignorance and hatred. Here are a couple that were published in Germany in the 30s. Like the one of the Obamas in the Oval Office, they express the fears and ignorance of many at the time.
http://www.calvin.edu/academic/cas/gpa/images/sturmer/ds11.jpg
http://www.calvin.edu/academic/cas/gpa/images/sturmer/ds7.jpg
The New Yorker publisher says the Obama cover is just satire and everyone understands. To that I say, he is too far removed from ordinary people to be an effective publisher. In my daily life in Los Angeles, I've come across a few people who generally hide their racism, but who believe and seem to take pleasure in the lies that have been fabricated about the Obamas. One saw The New Yorker article on a table and it clearly made him feel more confidant and justified in expressing his views. (This person screened a horrible pseudo-documentary about Obama for me. This documentary is being distributed online where it's being used to rile up racists.)
Being from Denmark I have to say this:
DO NOT MAKE CARTOONS OF THE MUSLIMS!
Apparently, some of them don't appreciate satire...
It all comes down to this. If Obama gets to be president, will the MSM do its job and report objectively on his actions or will they be afraid of the attacks of his followers? Think about it. The reactions to this cartoon are really worrisome (just read the comments posted here). History has shown that it's never good for a country when the ruler controls the press., and it's even scarier when the press seems to jump with glee into his pocket. Power is power and it must be kept in check no matter the ethnicity of the person exercising it. In a democracy anyone in power is fair game.
Have we all gotten so ignorant that we no longer get satire when we see it. God help us and comedy central.
Actually, I think what Stephen Colbert said is right. It's funny because it's TRUE. By reading all of Obama's interview transcripts and books, by watching him speak, by checking out the way he smiles...it's obvious he just hates America. He doesn't mean anything he says. It's all a facade. He and his troupe of merciless terrorists will kill you.
Guys, don't vote for Obama. The minute he gets this country he will destroy it. Not with guns, but with subversive-flagpin-abandonment.
Funny, how for a bunch of self-proclaimed satirists, satire doesn't seem to work on you people. Maybe it's not GOOD satire, necessarily. But unless you've got the 411 on the New Yorker conspiracy to kick Obama, I suggest you stay at home and mope for perhaps...thirty seconds over this cover. People who believe that any of what is being said about Obama is true were never going to vote for him anyway -- that's why they choose to believe it.
While I appreciate what Jon Stewart is arguing - that the cover is just a cartoon - I think in this instance he fails to appreciate the power of an image.
And even if the image was not influential, there is a basic standard of civility in discourse to which reputable media outlets usually hold themselves. This cover wasn't "controversial" and "thought-provoking" and it certainly wasn't "satire." It was just a visual depiction of lies that have been spread about the Obamas.
It's like actually burning the American flag - it's not illegal, it shouldn't be illegal, but it is disrespectful and inappropriate. It undermines popular discourse, rather than adding to it.
It wasn't funny. It wasn't even interesting. It was offensive.