Pandering to the Least Common Denominator
Posted by StormWarning on 14 Jul 2008 at 06:32 am | Tagged as: Commentary, Politics
The once respected New Yorker Magazine, known mostly for its arts and entertainment focus (read their headers: “Reporting 7 Essays,” “Arts & Culture,” “Humor,” “Fiction & Poetry,” “The Talk of the Town”), has fallen prey to misdirected humor/satire, and pandered to the lowest common denominator with its cover on its July 21st edition. The editors defend themselves by saying that they were satirizing the use of scare tactics etc. to derail Obama’s candidacy. Unfortunately, there are people, like one whose comment I read, that believe that “its a message from G-d…He is doing what He can to stop Obama…hopefully people will listen.” Indeed! That is the most ridiculous load of poppycock I have read so far…unfortunately (and very sadly), there are people in that lowest common denominator who will accept that as fact…many of those don’t even know what satire is, or wouldn’t recognize it if it hit them in the head!
The Obama campaign, as well as the campaign of Republican rival John McCain, slammed the cover as offensive:
“The New Yorker may think, as one of their staff explained to us, that their cover is a satirical lampoon of the caricature Sen. Obama’s right-wing critics have tried to create,” Obama spokesman Bill Burton said in a statement, reported by Politico. “But most readers will see it as tasteless and offensive. And we agree.”
“We completely agree with the Obama campaign, it’s tasteless and offensive,” McCain spokesman Tucker Bounds said in a statement.
From Alternet: The Bad Frame: Why Are the New Yorker, Salon and Other Liberal Media Doing the Right’s Dirty Work? This week’s New Yorker cover image of the Obamas is shocking in the racism and gross stereotyping that is built into its supposed satire.
Are we being too sensitive? From Editor and Publisher we have this:
On Howard Kurtz’s CNN media program today, Clarence Page of the Chicago Tribune called it “quite within the normal realms of journalism,” adding that “it’s just lampooning all the crazy ignorance out there.”
From Fox News we have this: Obama Campaign Calls New Yorker Magazine Cover “Tasteless and Offensive”
The inimitable Power Line blog seems to believe that Obama and McCain are being too sensitive.
Another journalist, Clarence Page of the Chicago Tribune defended it as “quite within the normal realms of journalism,” adding that “it’s just lampooning all the crazy ignorance out there.”
WAKE UP! The least common denominator in this country does not know what satire is, probably never read Jonathan Swift, and will see this cartoon as validation of their misguided prejudices. In fact, I’d bet that most of the people who comment about the cover of the New Yorker, never opened a copy of it to read any articles, and will not read the article in this edition to understand the satire (if they are capable of understaning), that the cover is a lampoon. I’m simply astounded…or maybe, its just too early in the morning (6:30am). But ask this question. If Joseph Lieberamn was running for President and there had been rumors of his being a money lender or some other stereotype, would it be acceptable to show a steroetypical Jewish man with peyes and a long nose doling out pennies?
No! dear readers. The New Yorker will not be read by the least common denominator of America…certainly not for the newstand price of $4.50. But the supposedly satirical cartoon on its cover depicting the Obamas as Muslims and terrorists will be spoken about in every tavern and other establishment where least common denominators live. And any suggesting that the New Yorker did this in an attempt to get people to blame “racist Republicans” is fodder only for the Rush Limbaugh audiences today and after who will revel in his droolingly derisive slime talk about how its the “Dems” who are racist. At best, this is another example of of the media, in this case, the New Yorker, clearly not understanding the Internet and the blogosphere.
Like it or not, ignorance, bigotry (I know I wrote bogotry but actually meant to coin a word, “blogotry“) and hatred run rampant in this country, and it isn’t Democrats or Liberals, Republicans or Conservatives…its the least common denominator. And that is my opinion, or my name isn’t StormWarning (oh, %#@!^*&&!…its not!). And yes, I am talking down to the least common denominator.
McCain, New Yorker, Obama, pandering, satire
I’m not getting whether you thought it was OK satire or offensive.
I’m still torn on the intention.. just poking fun satire with the sneaky attempt to show up the “lowest common denominators” and take away any criticism of Obama’s association with people like Williams Ayers, or an attempt to actually appeal to the LCD on behalf of team Hillary.
Don’t forget, team Hillary were the ones who introduced the Obama dishdasha photo and when asked whether he was a Muslim Hillary said, “not that I know of”.
Sneaky, if nothing else.
It wasn’t satire if most of the people viewing don’t know what satire is. The cover is what people are discussing, not the attempt at satire. Since most people who saw it don’t know what satire is, it sucked as satire…most people who are discussing it think that it represents the “truth.” And you know very well what I meant.
Well, I’m not so sure the people you’re speaking of have actually seen or are discussing this in large numbers. Most of them have probably already made up their minds Obama is a Muslim anyway. I hesitate to go too far out and judging too many people as morons because it sounds close to what Obama said in private in San Francisco about clingers and such. And as Stewart said, it was after all a cartoon.
Here’s the deal for me. We know the NY’er isn’t filled with morons–why would they do something that would harm Obama?
I’ve heard that there was an interview with the published of the New Yorker, who, after admitting that his magazine’s readership has fallen, then said that maybe “satire” wasn’t a strong suit anymore.
What did I say about “morons?” I said, “least common denominator.”
I’m using the term morons to describe those who can’t recognize satire, although I’m not sure anyone has proven it WAS satire yet. As you allude, there was some who thought the real motive was to improve a flagging circulation although I’m not sure how it helps them to pander to those who can’t understand their schtick (and who’ll never buy a copy). I guess it has improved their hit count, though.
The real problem is those people who would say, “this is another way for G-d to keep people from voting for Obama.” Don’t we know there are alot of reasons to make sure that McCain gets elected without trumping up another intonation of G-d’s name?
Again though, the Obama campaign didn’t see the cartoon as satire. The daughter of Medgar Evers was on the tube last night saying the cartoon was a “lynching”. So you need to cast your net pretty wide, methinks.
And the blanket/net of the “lowest common denominator” is extraordinarily huge. Haven’t you noticed? Its a funny thing (not really). Look around you everyday. At work, on the road, at the local restaurant. Don’t you have as hard a time as I do believing that the “intelligence bell curve” is actually balanced? Its sort of my concept, but I believe that there are an awful lot of “IQ-sharers” out there.
Storm, while your message is clear I’m amazed on a daily basis about how much I don’t know, some of which I thought I knew. The internet is the best thing and the worst thing ever invented.
We all have lots to learn. The key piece of wisdom, however, is that you must know what you do not know, and never feign that you know all. Yes, we all have alot to learn. The real danger lies in people offering opinions about security who have no basis for doing so, and then having others run off with that input in hand and considering it so.