BETWEEN THE LINES
Jonathan Alter
The Power of Images
The New Yorker cover only reinforces the silly Obama rumors.
When Harold Ross founded The New Yorker in 1925, he told potential investors that it was not edited for "the little old lady from Dubuque."
This is still true, as the flap over the latest cover suggests. Publishing an illustration of Barack Obama dressed as a Muslim fist-bumping his wife Michelle (with a semi-automatic over her shoulder) may have been meant as a parody of the dopey Internet rumor-mongering that has dogged the campaign for close to two years.
But it is indisputably harmful to the Obama campaign, which is why, though Obama himself wouldn't comment, his spokesman called the cartoon "tasteless and offensive."
To explain why it is harmful, consider Lesley Stahl and my cousin Paul.
Lesley Stahl covered the Reagan White House for CBS News. One day in 1984 she broadcast a five-minute (extremely long for TV news) blistering report on how President Reagan was cutting funding for public health and for children with disabilities. After it aired, the late Richard Darman, a top Reagan aide, called and said, "Congratulations! We loved it!"
Stahl was dumbfounded. The piece had been a hatchet job.
"Nobody heard what you said," Darman told her. The pictures Stahl had used to "cover" her story were of Reagan cutting ribbons at hospitals and speaking at the Special Olympics. The White House knew that these warm images spoke a lot louder than anything Stahl was reporting.
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next Page »
Loading Menu
Member Comments
Posted By: Diogenes 08 @ 08/03/2008 3:41:23 PM
Comment: The New Yorker did one thing right, it has caused us to think and talk about the rumors. Unfortunately, we continue to fail in truly looking at the man as determined by his past instead of the man as promoted by his speech writers.
Look at his past voting record, look at his church, look at his family and friends, look at his business associates. Listen to what he has said. (there are 50 American States, and 57 Islamic states) Then ask yourself honestly, is this the man worthy of the rock star worship he has been getting from the media. If he didn???t consider himself in the same category as Spears and Hilton, then why did he change the convention site to a stadium worthy of a rock star?
Posted By: Jose52 @ 07/22/2008 2:15:19 PM
Comment: Thanks. Just the plain facts! Why are we choosing this loser? Even Hilliary has more gravitas!
Posted By: Thewhitesmiter @ 07/22/2008 12:19:13 PM
Comment: What's wrong with a satire if it says what needs to be said and what it said is that you have a man whose
like a little boy, maybe a half-white boy, yes but there's one very aggressive woman at his side and she's the 'by any means necessary' type if you know what I mean. So you've really got to thank the New Yorker's team of artists for coming up with that insightful illustration because as they say, a picture's worth a thousand words.