Psst...come here....I have a secret to tell you about the New Yorker cover....

[brooklynite]

"Red State" conservatives and Independents don't read the New Yorker (it's Liberal and elitest you know...

Liberal elitests who do read the new Yorker won't change their voting decisions based on a cartoon on the cover...

and now, back to our discussion...

[Ian David]

1. I still prefer this cover of MacLean's

Maclean's Cover Featuring Bush as Saddam Causing Flap in U.S.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x3001709

[John Q. Citizen]

3. That's camp.

[Buck Rabbit]

8. So is this Satire that is supposed

to make us support Bush? Or is this the old fashioned type of satire where you actually mock the targets of your scorn not the target's victims?

Satire and humor become so confusing when The New Yorker gets involved. I tell ya, that magazine went to hell after they fired Brian Griffin.

[JoFerret]

11. Sorry to be so out of tough with media gossip

but what did Brian Griffin do at the New Yorker. And what changed after he left?

[Buck Rabbit]

24. Brian Griffin was fired as a writer by the New Yorker

when they found out he was one credit short of getting his degree from Brown. Despite being a mensa member and their satisfaction with his previous work. Brian has "a wit as dry as the martinis he drinks." according to those who know him best.

[JoFerret]

25. He lied on his resume?

I don't remember noticing is name. But then I don't read it cover to cover.

[MilesColtrane]

2. You're right. The trogs don't read the New Yorker.

They'll simply see the picture on the cover and never realize that it's satire.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

31. Right! You've made my point brilliantly!

We liberals know and understand the satire. We're not the issue. The issue is those same "hard-working whites" who won't understand the satire and are probably not familiar with the history of the New Yorker cartoons.

I'm not sure I understand why this is so difficult for some of us to understand. While we may totally get the satire, there are about 30% of this electorate who are easily swayed by imagery and symbolism such as this.

[woolldog]

4. Psst. ...I have news for you too.

That cover is going to be broadcast into almost every single home in america. Carry on....

[Bluerthanblue]

7. which might be part of the reason they used it-

I think it was really poor judgement,- or really stupid greed.

As to the OP's statement,
How many people buy the National Inquirer? - yet the cover page sure gets noticed by people from all walks of life.


The people this cartoon is about, don't take the time to read the text- (by and large)- They rely on quick visuals, and sound bites- and they are going to feast on this. IMO



big mistake on their part-


peace

[JoFerret]

12. Good news. Thanks. N/t

.

[woolldog]

15. For you, I'm sure. n/t

[JoFerret]

16. Of course it's good news

You prefer the suppression of free expression and the keeping of things unsaid unaired?
I think this has an excellent chance of serving the Obama campaign well.

[woolldog]

17. You know, it's possible to not like something

without wanting to ban it. I never said anything about "suppression of free expression."

I find the cover distasteful and racist.

[JoFerret]

19. You do?

OK. I don't.

[woolldog]

20. I wouldn't expect you to. n/t

[JoFerret]

21. There you go again

deadendering.

Do something useful:Irony my shirts

[JTFrog]

28. Smells like ass.

Why the fuck do people like this still post here?

They contort themselves trying to stay just this side of the rules and all the while their ass is hanging out in the breeze for all to see.

Too bad it takes the full monty to get a pizza delivered around here.

[crankychatter]

29. "ignore" is like air freshener - NT

[JoFerret]

34. Shutting others down is exactly like air freshener

Good analogy. Filling the air with freshener chemicals instead of actual air.

But please add me to your list.

[JoFerret]

33. Why be coy?

Why not say what you actually think and put your full ignorance quotient on display?

[JTFrog]

37. Why contort yourself daily?

"Why not say what you actually think and put your full ignorance quotient on display?"

Pot... Kettle... Black.

[JoFerret]

38. I write exactly what I think

But I don't think I need to apologize for the fact that my thinking does not fit one of your boxes.

[thewiseguy]

43. Your good news is my bad news

[ravishane]

41. Exactly

The PROBLEM is that only liberals read the thing while EVERYONE ELSE will just see the cover. Visual media is very powerful, especially with regard to stupid people.

[otohara]

5. It Will Be Shown Over & Over Again on MSM

it's too controversial for the talking-heads to pass up.

[Avalux]

6. You're right, they don't read it and they won't understand the point.

They'll juat see that cover all over MSM news outlets and hear the distorted ramblings of pundits.

[enough already]

39. Exactly. This is a potential disaster

The neanderthals will never get the satire. This is already a tight race. As obvious as the satire is to a lot of us, there isn't anybody in the 'middle' who is going to look at this and feel good about Obama. F-ing a-holes at the New Yorker...

[ravishane]

42. Let's see the serious "terrorist fist jab"

media run with it as "satirizing the fears and questions some people have about the Obamas." While dismissing it as obvious satire, they can still use it on Fox and elsewhere to just raise doubts about what stupid people know and don't know about the Obamas.

[liberalmuse]

9. I think it's going to piss off a lot of liberals.

I give the cover flap two days before it fizzles (which is like 5 weeks in MSM time) because the looming biggest economic disaster since The Great Depression just might warrant some air time. Since most people are finding the cover offensive, the intended satire was obviously buried in Republican ugliness. I've no doubt that if Jonathan Swift published his famous article today, the Republican's would start eating babies. They've fucking taken all the fun out of satire, because they've no shame or conscience at all.

[JoFerret]

14. Thanks for the modest proposal

if it does get discussed it will introduce a modicum of fresh air and sunlight.

[eleny]

10. Psssssst.... It'll be in their faces on the tv by morning

[CreekDog]

13. this liberal, elitist will not be reading much of the New Yorker either

:eyes:

however, this particular cartoon is not really noteworthy in that it is as unfunny as most New Yorker cartoons.

[wisteria]

18. The media will make sure everyone gets a chance to see and comment on this caricature. n/t

[Jed Dilligan]

22. You still see the cover in POP displays, even if you get all your political news

from Hustler.

[Neshanic]

23. Psst....I have a secret for you. They watch FOX.

[JVS]

26. You know who does though? White women of a certain age with money (or at least wish they were posh)

and live on the E or W coasts. The Harriet Christian/ Puma demographic

[johnnydrama]

27. first of all

There's nothing to read in the New Yorker about the subject of the cover. There's no article about it.

This is 2008. Nobody has to have ever heard of the New Yorker to see the cover of the magazine.

[npincus]

30. Please... it's on Sludge, all over the MSM... the accompanying article is positive

you can bet THAT they won't read.

[MaineDem]

32. BUT... those not "Liberal" and "elite" will see the cover on news stands

They aren't going to read the mag to see that it's satire.

And what will the Rushbots be told? And then spread?

[crispini]

35. They're going to put it all over the news.

Hate to tell you this, but this is a giant footbullet for the left.

[greguganus]

36. And of course hillaryis44 has the NY cover plastered on their page. n/t

[demokatgurrl]

40. They don't "read" it, but they are aware of it,

and they do go to newsstands, and they probably DO look at it for ammo. And we (the mass "we", you know, we extreme left-wing libbruls) have provided it, yet again.