Obama and The New Yorker deal

Philosophy Forums Society, Government, and Economics
1

This is the cover of this weeks The New Yorker. The mainstream media has made a big deal out of it. They think it’s obscene, offensive, etc. As the news junkie that I am, I’ve noticed that it’s been mentioned at great length by cnn, msnbc, and fox every 10 minutes.

This is supposed to satire the popular belief among a significant minority in the US who actually believe more or less the things depicted in the picture (that he’s a muslim, a terrorist, his wife militant, etc). Obama’s campaign response to this has been negative.

What are your thoughts on this? Myself, I’m pretty sure that it’s nothing other than beneficial for Obama’s campaign. Polls taken recently have shown that a significant minoirity of people in the US believe that Obama is a muslim which as a result further means that they won’t vote for him.

With every media outlet putting the picture into context and then mentioning that there’s a significant percentage of people out there who hold these false notions about Obama, the percentage of people who believe Obama’s a muslim will decrease and more people will vote for him.

I don’t see that anyone will actually believe that he’s a Muslim because of it. The fear from the Obama camp is that some will see this picture out of context while walking by a newsstand or something and actually have their false beliefs reaffirmed by it. But let’s get real here. Sure, doubtlessly there will be some people, but with the aid of pretty much every media outlet putting the picture into context every 10 minutes, I doubt that in the bottom line Obama won’t benefit from this

Obama has really nothing to complain about. This issue with this group of people who think he’s a Muslim had to eventually be taken care of somehow, and now it is being taken care of pretty effectively free of charge.

But I understand politics is politics, and Obama’s response to this had to have been negative in nature. I mean, can you imagine Obama praising the comic, and actually saying that it’s funny satire. That would seem suspect and reaffirm the false beliefs of some. But, by having some campaign leaders coming out and denouncing it they are adding on to the controversy and as a result the story gets more airtime, and Obama more votes

2

four dollars and fifty cents for that hogwash is highway robbery (given the all important presidential race and all).

Imagine what would happen if you cut off the largest avenue of campaining, the controlled media.

I have been saying for a long time that the only thing achieved through smear campains is the formation of what i like to call “symmetrical shittiness”.

The race for presidency is a complete joke.

70% of campain funds are spent of t.v ads. god only knows what percentage of those ads are pure slander.

It’s basically one big shit show where some jackass puts on a giant act and tries to have the most mass appeal.

They take donations from shitty companies looking to use the president as a means to further their own wealth.

profiteering is it called?

The bush organisation is like Dr. Claw from inspector gadget. We know that they are evil but we just can’t seem to pin them.

If i had it my way there would be a law against blood relative presidents. What’s next, monarchy?

Bush senior passed it on to clinton, clinton to bush junior (a damn power play and now they got bills wife lined up) and some pesky new guy.

Some think Obama is the anti-christ, others think he is a bright-eyed nervous black man in a white mans world.

As far as socio-political agendas go, Obama pretty much had it in the bag. now with this MacCain business (or whatever his boring name is) what’s probably happened here is their organisation is pulling all the strings trying to win the election. Why wouldn’t thy use slander right? nothing has stopped them in the past.

personally i find the cover page offensively racist. What kind of maniacal laugh did the “patriotic” artist have when he drew this cover?

3

censorship!

how dare you question or think anything bad about our new presidential candidate…

how dare you blaspheme our new obamamessiah!

you will worship our democrat tyrant.

you will not say anything that disagrees with those that worship him.

if you disagree with our obamamessiah, you are a racist, a sexist, a war monger who doesn’t care about the poor or the immigrants.

recreate 68!

-Imp

4

Political Satire is very old. And those at the brunt of it always complain.

what is different now?

If people are dumb enough to fall for the simplicity of it, then is it not a learning process that in the end, should improve them?

5

It’s a political cartoon. duh. :confused:

6

I suppose I can see where the Obama-camp is coming from, in that it could easily be mis-interpreted.

7

Yes. Of course the problem with satire is that there are different levels of messages happening and there’s no real control over which message is dominant. In the end, no matter what the original intent, the dominant message might end up being “Obama and his wife are terrorists”.

8

Actually that is not true, all one has to do is know the IQ level of the majority and target that. One reason that Democracy is the best of the worst forms of government.

9

If its racist then where is McCain in the white sheet? The New Yorker rarely pulls its punches. It slams everyone. Its niether Democratic, nor Republican. The New Yorker satires everyone. I imagine they will run with this for a while to up their sales then they will pick on McCain.

It is just another satircal cartoon. It actually is pretty funny. His wife with a gun? Have you seen her and heard her? I doubt she would know which end to hold. The lady is to much USA city and too feminine to even want to touch a weapon like that :laughing: Obama couldn’t figure out the safetys, unless instructed how… Their weapons are words and ideas. The satire of the cartoons plays that very well. :laughing:

10

Is any of this on topic, imp?

11

I agree! I don’t think he filled out his permission slips in triplicate, nor do I remember him waiting for approval.

12

It seems to me he saw the word Obama down and went off on some rant.

13

how dare you question or think anything bad about our new presidential candidate…

how dare you blaspheme our new obamamessiah!

you will worship our democrat tyrant.

you will not say anything that disagrees with those that worship him.

if you disagree with our obamamessiah, you are a racist, a sexist, a war monger who doesn’t care about the poor or the immigrants.

if you can’t see the relevance of censorship that’s your problem…

but the cartoon isn’t true…

it is the muslims who get pissed about cartoons…

-Imp

14

Oh, not to worry, he always rants. It is a psychological disorder, but he carries the cure on him. Not to worry.

15

Is your point that some of the media outlets have taken upon themselves to correct the popular belief among a significant minority of people that Obama’s a muslim and using this New Yorker deal as the excuse for it? Yea.

Myself, I wouldn’t go so far as be so sarcastic and emotional in my description of this phenomenon, unless I was pretty sure my guy would lose come November. Besides, the same stupid emotional sarcastic comments can be made about the other media outlets, cough FOX News cough that insist on slandering Barack Hussein Obama.

Oh My Beautiful Jayzus! Is that a terrorist secret handshake?! :laughing: Obama’s Baby Mama :laughing: Pathetic. Utterly pathetic.

16

Once upon a time, the media were a small collection of intellectuals, with the degradation of that came a media that driven by the mass intellect. With so many voices now, man is being pressured to either think, learn, or give up.

When a distinct psychological change is effected in the human mind, there will become distinc psychologies that are the real distinctions between men. These distinctions are not apparent to the eye, but can be discerned through language.

17

no but the cover page is blatantly racist 8-[

18

if you disagree with our obamamessiah, you are a racist

-Imp

19

Agreed.

20

didn’t they revoke the right to be racist?