CreateDebate


Debate Info

Debate Score:57
Arguments:20
Total Votes:70
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 What do you think of the 7/13 New Yorker cover? (20)

Debate Creator

borme(660) pic



What do you think of the 7/13 New Yorker cover?

On Sunday, July 13th, The New Yorker Magazine ran a cover on the magazine that appears to depict Barack and Michelle Obama as terrorist enemies of the United States.

The New Yorker claims that the image is a satirical lampoon of the caricature Sen. Obama's right-wing critics have tried to create. Both camps have called it tasteless and offensive. What do you think?


Add New Argument
5 points

This is satire! The fact that people are acting offended at this just shows that we're an overly sensitive idiot democracy.

Satire is an art form, and outrage is just one of the emotions on its palette. I suppose this is too nuanced of an idea for the American public, however.

4 points

Agreed. People are way too sensitive. The cover is completely misinterpreted. If you don't like it, don't read it!

This bizarre outcry makes me appreciate one of my previous political science professors. This prof. loved to make fun of the talk show bombasts and television talking heads. He also, constantly, made us understand the an important distinction in American politics:

There are Liberals and there are Democrats, there are Conservatives and there are Republicans.

It is easy to tell, in this situation, who the liberals are and who the Democrats are. Or, should I say, the people who real leftist values and the people who are in it to win it.

This article is perfectly understandable; a wonderfully well-done sarcastic cartoon, a cartoon obviously poking fun at conservative hyperbole. Anyone who reads the New Yorker would understand this, and the picture was aimed at New Yorker readers. The article it was representing would perfectly explain the point behind the picture as well.

So who, then, would misunderstand this? How would this picture do damage to the Obama campaign?

You'll see that the people who would look at this cartoon as somehow accurately representing Barack Obama already believe in what the cartoon is making fun of. They think Barack Obama is a radical Muslim with a militant Communist wife. This picture "validates" their view; even though it actually doesn't.

Of course, these people would believe such nonsense no matter how many or how few sarcastic cartoons there are. It wouldn't have changed their minds to have a cartoon depicting Obama as extremely patriotic and his wife a model of American values.

I've heard some nonsense in my day, but the people who are looking at this as some sort of conspiracy or propaganda effort against Barack Obama are really putting me on edge. I voted in the primary for Obama, I plan on voting for him in the coming presidential election, and I don't see any problem with this cartoon whatsoever.

Side: Sarcasm

If you loved that cartoon, you'll love Archie Bunker! Too bad that show is no longer on the air. Imagine all the material they have to work with today!

Side: humor
3 points

I think that the cover was pretty tasteless. It shows Obama as a Muslim terrorist with a picture of Osama Bin Laden hanging on the wall of the Oval Office. His wife has a machine gun slung over her back and there is a flag burning in the background. While they claim that it was simply used to poke fun at what the Republicans are trying to depict Obama as, I still think it is very offensive and should not have been published.

Side: Tasteless and Offensive
3 points

I think the cover is trying to be sarcastic. In particular, it seems to be mocking the Terrorist Fist Jab comment from Fox News. My guess is the article does its best to debunk the Obama smear campaign that the cover depicts.

Side: Sarcasm
3 points

Well, I do find the whole Obama Terrorists association wrong, but the real reason why they did this was cause they want your attention. These journalists who do this are we on the interwebz like to call "attention whores", and hey, they got it.

Same thing with that Rolling Stone asshole who put that shit up of McCain in a torture camp. They're attention whores who want you to say "zomg, how horrible, now i must read". and it works, of course.

Yes, Michelle Obama says a LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOT of stupid shit that makes me surprised that Obama hasn't smacked the bitch yet, but is she really a black panther? Yes, she uses the Race card, and yes, she uses the Sexism plea (only for herself of course, she's fine with attacking Hillary Clinton and her marriage), but i still wouldn't exactly say she was an America Hating Black Panther (but i can see the mock there), but this whole Obama being a terrorist thing has been based on false rumors, not on what he has said or done (just cause all of his friends are America haters, doesn't mean he is).

Yes, i truly hate Michelle, but i actually like Obama. He speaks well, and likes to dance on Ellen, or put his playlist on Rolling Stones. He also makes motivational speeches. He's a cool guy (even though he doesn't seem like the type of guy i could just sit down and watch a game with). He's more like that rich kid who played polo but still tried to hang out with us gamers who play paintball (even though he would just end up not doing any of those things, and just sit at the side lines). if anything, what would have been a better mock portrayal of him would be some elitist like person.

But in the end, this is just moar Attention Whorism from the idiotic media. Seriously, the shit i see on New Yorker, Rolling Stones, New York Times, and MSNBC makes Howard Stern look like a decent reporter.

Side: Sarcasm
3 points

One would hope that it's a non-issue. People who read The New Yorker tend to be fairly intelligent individuals with the presence of mind to detect the tenor of the point attempting to be made. There are exceptions. Was there not a commentator who accused Michelle Obama of giving Barack a "terrorist fist bump" when she introduced him at some speaking event? I read that and almost choked on my coffee. Seriously? This is the same action I've seen baseball players give to their teammates upon scoring and walking into the dugout. Somehow terrorism has infected America's pastime as well!

Side: Sarcasm
2 points

Call for Action: 3 Month Boycott of the New Yorker Magazine

The cover of the New Yorker Magazine is racially insensitive, racially inflammatory, and racist.

Certainly some people will call it satire; but, I believe it has, and will, just reinforce the false racist statements made by republicans, which are intended to undermine and demean Barack Obama.

For this reason, I call for everyone to Boycott the New Yorker Magazine for six months, or until they put someone from the NAACP on their editorial staff for six months, and accept and publish articles on racial insensitivity in every edition for six months.

Until then, Boycott the New Yorker Magazine.

Thanks so much for your time and support.

Side: Tasteless and Offensive

Barack Obama in Muslim garb and Michelle Obama dressed ala Angela Davis, the 70's Poster Girl of the Black Panthers and the epitome of Black Power is a depiction indeed how some people would like you to view them and wrapping it in a safety net of lampooning a presidential candidate makes it seem like a harmless parody. But is isn't is it? It is one of the most insulting and insidious method of brainwashing I've seen in a very long time. It panders to our worst fears as a nation that if a black man were elected president, this is what we will have to face. Not just any black man, mind you, but Barack Hussein Obama whose very name and upbringing have been the subject of much conversation and speculation since day one of the primaries. Couple that with Michelle Obama's statement in which she told a nation that ‘For the First Time in My Adult Lifetime, I Am Really Proud of My Country’ and what do you have? You have the seeds that sow more misunderstanding, hatred and bring us down to a level in which a well respected magazine can flaunt imaginary terrorism and caricatures of a Pantheresque figure without blinking an eye.

Side: Tasteless and Offensive
1 point

So as far as you're concerned, the American public is stupider than your average bear and can be easily manipulated by a picture, right? I mean, I'm not for Barack but I don't think for one moment that he's a terrorist and this picture right here in front of me of Bara.... OMG he's a terrorist ! ? !

Side: humor
1 point

For a nation that advocates free speech so vehemently, its surprising that so many people think its in bad taste. I don’t find it offensive to Obama at all - in fact, it may even be supportive to his campaign telling people to lighten up, dammit.

What I could find offensive, without reference to the cartoonist who quite successfully portrayed exaggerated public sentiments, is that just because Obama may have been Moslem it apparently qualifies him as a could-be terrorist.

May I ask: What's the worst thing could happen if Barrack's really moslem?

Supporting Evidence: Link to Debate (www.createdebate.com)
Side: Sarcasm

Political correctness and people that get offended at the drop of a hat, suck.

Side: humor
1 point

when i see that picture i see 1939 Germany, the Jewish man with the big lips. this is to far, have we become so jaded that we do not see this is propaganda. the ignorant masses (republicans) :P see this and it verifies in there stupid minds that Obama just sound to much like Osama. Fair enough challenging him on something else on policy or other, but this is a personal attack and it is unacceptable.

Side: Tasteless and Offensive

I think the New Yorker back then made a mistake and what they thought was satire backfired on the publication.

Side: Tasteless and Offensive
-2 points
4 points

I agree. The cover was meant to create buzz about Obama, which it obviously has. The sad fact is that many American's still believe that Obama is a Muslim (which in their mind implies terrorist) and that he isn't patriotic because he didn't wear a US flag lapel pin. Hopefully this article and the controversy around it will teach some of the uninformed people out there the facts so they can decide for themselves who they should vote for, and not let the media decide for them.

Side: Accurate portrayal of US' perception
4 points

Why do many Americans still associate Obama with Islam when Obama denies being a Muslim?

Supporting Evidence: Fight the Smears: the truth about Barack Obama's faith (my.barackobama.com)
Side: Accurate portrayal of US' perception
4 points

I agree. My father is one of those super right wing republicans who thinks that Obama is a Muslim terrorist. I cannot even begin to count the number of forwards I get from him that imply this. This is a real concern to many in the country and I'm glad that it's out there. It's like the White Elephant in the room that no one is talking about, until now. I'm glad this major concern for many Americans is out. Because whether he is or isn't, if it's a real concern for many, it should be discussed at length.

Side: Accurate portrayal of US' perception
2 points

Concerning the flag lapel pin... The real reason for not wearing a flag lapel

:P

Side: humor