Roger Simon at Politico weighs in on The New Yorker's recent cover:
... [T]his is what is called the Idiot’s Veto: If a single person might not get a joke, then you should not tell the joke. All humor (and everything else) should be reduced to the lowest common denominator just to make sure nobody misunderstands anything.While I get the satire, and personally though the cartoon was funny, I understand where Obama is coming from when he says that it could reinforce the rumors the cartoon is trying satirize. I would go a step further (a step that Obama cannot take) and say that those who are overreacting are the uneducated and ignorant -- hardly The New Yorker's primary audience.This would, of course, remove a lot of the humor from life. Shows like “The Daily Show with Jon Stewart” and “The Colbert Report,” both of which are almost pure satire, would have to go off the air. And the late-night comics would have to shut up. And many writers would have to stop writing. All in order to have an idiot-proof society.
What say you? Is the cover offensive? Good satire? Bad satire?


Comments (3)
It's not offensive (not to me anyway), but I think that it's bad satire, too on the nose. On a different magazine, one that leaned the other direction, folks would be screaming bloody murder. As it is I do think there are folks that are overreacting.
Posted by Scott
|
July 17, 2008 7:49 AM
Posted on July 17, 2008 07:49
I found it neither offensive nor did I find it to be particularly good satire. It isn't terrible, but it isn't good either. On the whole, I find the 'controversy' overblown and uninteresting.
Posted by sidfaiwu
|
July 17, 2008 9:55 AM
Posted on July 17, 2008 09:55
I believe the cover is good satire. I applaud the magazine for the guts it took to actualy use the picture. We should drop the PC mask and see it for what it is, and that is a jab at the misinformed
Posted by lot2learn
|
July 18, 2008 2:45 AM
Posted on July 18, 2008 02:45