The cover of this week’s issue of the New Yorker depicts Barack Obama in Arabic(ie: Muslim to most people) garb performing a “terrorist fist jab” with Michelle Obama, who is dressed like a Black Panther. Behind them, the US flag and a picture of Osama Bin Laden hangs over the fireplace. The New Yorker’s defense of the cover is that it “satirizes the use of scare tactics and misinformation in the Presidential election to derail Barack Obama’s campaign.”
His point is well seen, but nothing on the cover references the fear mongers. This lack of context means that the same people who have fallen for misinformation and scare tactics will think the New Yorker is verifying their point of view. I’m not saying the New Yorker shouldn’t be able to publish this. Nor am I saying that the New Yorker has to be positive towards Obama. I’m simply saying that the New Yorker should be above reinforcing the fears of the right. I do assume that regular readers of the New Yorker would get the point. However, this cover will be seen by many who would never read the New Yorker due to how incendiary it is.
A magazine with the reputation of the New Yorker should act more responsibly.
Edit at 11:40 AM, July 15, 2008: I’ve been thinking more about it and it seems to me that the problem is simply in the execution. If, as an example, they had put the scene in a thought bubble coming from a scared stereotypical white man the satire would be clearer and it would be far more difficult for it to be misinterpreted. Of course, even if was done badly, The New Yorker has a right to say it which is something we should be happy about.
Posted by Quix 
