New Yorker: Obama = Terrorist Cover,
Maureen Dowd & Petrelis?
Maureen Dowd & Petrelis?
Hendrik Hertzberg, staff writer for the New Yorker, on his blog today looks at the past week's controversy over his magazine's satirical cover with Michele and Barack Obama in terrorist drag. He writes:
That cover of ours seems to have kicked off a bit of a fuss. I haven’t read all the comments. Life is short, and when I Google the blogs for “obama ‘new yorker’ cover” I get twenty thousand hits, on top of the 1.75 million I get from a regular search. But I’ve read a sampling.
Oh, like who, for example? Anyone in the mainstream corporate media write something to catch your eye, Mr. Hertzberg?
Nevertheless, our cover seems to have launched a less toxic but still unfortunate meme: the idea that Obama can’t take a joke—that “he’s so tightly wrapped, overcalculated and circumspect that he can’t even allow anyone to make jokes about him,” in Maureen Dowd’s words.
And did any blogs interest you enough to the point that you simply had to link to their writing?
A few commenters on this or that blog have charged that for this or that crazy reason—to get revenge for Hillary’s defeat, to serve our shadowy corporate masters, to help the Republicans, whatever—The New Yorker was bent on damaging Obama and keep him from getting elected President. An extremely marginal view, to be sure. But it may be worth repeating that it’s horseshit. If proof is needed, take a look at this [entry at Petrelis Files]. (Note: At the magazine, Françoise Mouly’s primary responsibility is—wait for it—cover selection.)
Out of millions of hit for this subject, Mr. Hertzberg, you chose only one -- mine. Thanks for linking to and acknowledging the information I uncovered and wrote about. I'm just trying to keep you media folks honest and bring transparency to bear in my media advocacy work.
Of course, what I'd ultimately like from the New Yorker is a dedicated web page listing all of the staff members' donations to politicians; and at the federal, state and local levels, over the past twenty years.
Linking to me is certainly nice and very appreciated, but news and opinion column consumers need full disclosure from the New Yorker, and all mainstream media, on their sites, disclosing donations by executives and editorial staffs.
1 comment:
This comment is from my friend Bob in Chicago:
Michael, what I find "viciously offensive" is not the magazine cover, but Obama's opposition to full equality for LGBT folk. And that's just a beginning of an Obama offensiveness that portends full backing to U. S. imperialism and the business elites here at home. He is the dream corporate candidate: an African American who can push race "neutrality" at home and put a face of color on global criminality.
(I tried to post this to your blog, but couldn't figure out how to navigate my way into it.)
BOB SCHWARTZ
Post a Comment