Was it sattire or a clear cut sign that racism in America isn't going anywhere?

Question

In reference to the comic on the cover of the 7-13-08 edition of the New Yorker magazine, editors claim is is common political sattire. My understanding of sattire is to take something that may be true an expand on it in a humouros way. Aside from the fist bump what else in that picture could evn remotely be claimed to be true. My biggest issues are two-fold.

1. While I am not a regular reader of the New Yorker magazine, I am aware of their political cartoons IN their magazine. I have never however, seen a political cartoon of theirs on the cover of the magazine. If I am wrong please send me a source.

2. Would this form of disrespect ever be done to a white man that was running for the higest office in the strongest nation in the world during his presidential campaign.

Answer 1

its hard to control the masses when they are spread out across a whole continent

Answer 2

The thing that's true about it is that it's true that Obama IS being portrayed that way among the dumber Republicans.

1. I can't answer that.  I'm fairly certain that the NY has editorialized on its cover before.

2. Yes, quite often during the 2000 and 2004 campaigns (and every other month, it seems) there were many unflattering caricatures of Bush on many magazine covers. Check out MacLeans Oct1 2007 issue.  Or "The Nation." Or the New Yorker's own February 27, 2006 cover, depicting the Bush-Cheny relationship ala "Brokeback Mountain."

Nah, this seems more to be a case of looking for offense in order to find it (and hype) than any actual -ism on the part of the New Yorker.

I've said it before, the REAL "media bias" is towards laziness and sensationalism.

Answer 3

When it comes to Satire, color doesn't make a big difference.  Who's to say McCain won't show up on the next issue.  It's just that Obama and his wife lend themselves to this type of thing.   The two of them are not above being racist...Just because a person is black doesn't mean he or she isn't racist, it goes both ways!  Mrs. Obama comes across as a very bossy woman.  I've seen Mr. Obama just sit there and "take" some of the mouthy she has dished out in TV interviews.  His Muslim past is still an uncertainty with a lot of people.  I think he is trying to be a fair minded man, but he has a lot of baggage with him.   The New Yorker is just a stepping stone of things to come.  If Mr. Obama can survive this, it will make him stronger for what lies ahead.  Just so you know, I'm not looking at either candidate with favor.

Answer 4

When I saw the magazine cover, I knew exactly what they were trying to do.  They were covering EVERY SINGLE crazy-*** email I get (and I'm sure others do too) about these asinine ideas behind Obama (that he is a Muslim and he wants to take over America for Al Queda, that he hates America and won't salute the flag, etc).  There are more of these vicious rumors/lies going around about Obama than there have ever been of any candidate or president.  I'm not sure where they are generating from, but I think it is ridiculous, and I'm not even a supporter of Obama. I just think it is stupid that so many people will believe some random email, without checking facts for themselves.  

Half my family is terrifed to vote for Obama.. you know why?  Because of these stupid lies. And, the cover of the New Yorker was just that -- a picture, if you will, of all those lies rolled into one.  Was it tasteless?  yeah, probably.  But I don't think it was racist.  if these lies were being spread about GW or McCain or anyone else, they would have probably done the same thing.  I think the real issue is that these rumors and lies and atrocious emails are being spread like wildfire, and that intelligent (?) people are believing them.  There is no other person in political history that has had as much false information spread about them, with such national attention.

Answer 5

SATIRE!!! They've published plenty of borderline offensive political cartoons i.e. the Bush administration sitting around a flooded Oval Office a week or so after Katrina. And the article that the controversial Obama cover refers to is strongly critical of the absurd rumors about Obama. The New Yorker magazine has always been pretty liberal-leaning. Anyway, here's a link to the artist's page:

Edit: I can't put the link in for some reason. Just Google Barry Blitt + New Yorker.