WOW.

[apocalypsos]

Daaamn. That is just ... that's pretty much ALL of the fail. Nobody gets any more fail for the next week and a half. We're all out. We're going to have to ship in fail from Asia or borrow a cup of fail from Canada or something.

Comments

[crediniaeth.livejournal.com]

Hmm... I wonder what political leaning that cartoonist is.

*facepalm*

[doqz.livejournal.com]

Liberal actually. This was supposed to be a satire.

[kumquatweekend.livejournal.com]

On the cover of the New Yorker, for Pete's sake? That is one poor-ass excuse for satire.

[impertinence.livejournal.com]

what's sadder is that it could have been decent satire, but there are enough people who actually believe something along those lines that they just didn't do enough for it to be anything other than facepalm-worthy.

[tully-argyle.livejournal.com]

I'd heard that. But I'd say it failed, bigtime.

[apocalypsos.livejournal.com]

"Supposed to be" being the operative part of that sentence. *sigh*

[apocalypsos.livejournal.com]

I know, right? It's obvious what they were going for but ... but, OUCH.

[loony-moony.livejournal.com]

Wow. That's just, wow. Seriously, The New Yorker? Even in irony, this is fail encapsulated.

[etoilepb.livejournal.com]

There's been a very long discussion about this from "trained professionals" (a lot of people with masters and doctorate level degrees in things like women's studies, law, etc etc) in another LJ that I read. Several of them have put forth explanations of, "If you're doing parody, it needs to go so far that people CAN'T think you mean it seriously," and after reading those I see what they mean.

That said, that's why it's so fail: it goes far enough to be offensive and not far enough that the joke is immediate the first second you look at it.

[elohvee.livejournal.com]

Eep. I expected better from them.

[nyoka.livejournal.com]

Oh, hell no.

[xturtle.livejournal.com]

This actually makes for an interesting exercise: what could have been done differently to make it funny? Looking at it as-is, it's hard to offer constructive comment because the fail is just so BIG. What does going far enough to make the joke apparent look like?

I haven't come up with it yet, but I'm still back at the massive fail, gaping.

[minim_calibre]

Holy shit. Let the fail rationing begin.

[kumquatweekend.livejournal.com]

I hate to say it, but the average American is not smart enough to catch on.

[apocalypsos.livejournal.com]

Every time I think about the intelligence of the average American, I think of the Patton Oswalt (I think that's who it was) routine where he points out that if the average IQ is 100, then half of the people you run into on a daily basis have a double-digit IQ.

[azurelunatic]

Here, some fresh imported fail: http://failblog.wordpress.com/?p=1684

...unfortunately, I don't think that fail measures up to

... oh, and they've even got a flag burning, nice touch.

[hawklaw.livejournal.com]

I think if they had shown a "normal" family scene of the Obamas around the edges, with this in a lens (maybe with Bill O'Faily out in the bushes looking in through a telescope)... just something that went that extra step to show that this is the filter being laid over Obama by Faux News and their ilk. Of course then, any "joke" would have been beaten to death. As it is, this sucks.

[apocalypsos.livejournal.com]

There's a really good example here of why it sucks as satire, comparing it to Stephen Colbert's interpretation of a right-wing pundit. Stephen Colbert works as a character because no one in their right mind believe he's really like that. That IS an exaggeration.

This, on the other hand, isn't. There are a LARGE percentage of Americans who believe every single "exaggeration" in that picture. The extreme right-wingers out there are going to adopt that image in a heartbeat, because there's no filter to show that the artist is portraying such a belief about the Obamas as an idiotic and ignorant stance to invest in.

[dargie.livejournal.com]

Are they fucking kidding? Because that's about the most offensive thing I've seen in... just about forever.

[hawklaw.livejournal.com]

Exactly. I get the idea, and there are ways to do it correctly. This wasn't one of them. Honestly, it's something that needs to be pointed out. I think it was you who posted that Daily Show clip with the montage about Obama, pointing out this very thing in the mainstream media. THAT was done right, with right having the value of not making me want to stab things.

On another topic, I think repeatedly watching your icon has enhanced my calm.

[cacahuate.livejournal.com]

That is just ... that's pretty much ALL of the fail. Nobody gets any more fail for the next week and a half. We're all out. We're going to have to ship in fail from Asia or borrow a cup of fail from Canada or something.

QFT. Kudos for making me laugh!

[doqz.livejournal.com]

Ironically the representation of Obama as a Muslim came from Hillary's campaign.

IIRC they distributed a picture of him from Kenya, in the local garb.

In yet farther irony McCain already jumped in front of this train and condemned the cover as offensive and unacceptable.

OTOH New Yorker is being talked about more than they've been in at least a decade. So I guess they got what they wanted.

[slashfairy.livejournal.com]

oh, ow.

just...

ow.

[etoilepb.livejournal.com]

There's a bit in a Futurama episode where two clones (John Jackson and Jack Johnson, I believe) are running for president. One claims his opponent's plan "Goes too far!" and the other says his opponent's plan, "doesn't go too far enough!"

This is indeed the first time I've ever looked at something and thought, "EXACTLY. It doesn't go too far enough!"

(There are, though, people in the world who think Colbert's for real. My college roommate's grandmother is one. And to think, I had thought the woman was intelligent, if wrong-headed...)

[elorie.livejournal.com]

Much as I am loath to even appear to be defending them...the average American doesn't read "The New Yorker." They are proud of that, actually; they expect their readership to keep up intellectually, which gives them a certain kind of snob appeal.

Of course, all that coupled with this cover leaves me with the impression that they aren't as smart as they think they are. I'm pretty much in their target audience (academic in my forties) and I'm not getting it.

[goodbyebird]

What the hell is that? They out that one the cover of The New Yorker? Low. Low low low.

[lavenderfrost.livejournal.com]

Off-topic, but I *adore* your icon.

[ficangel.livejournal.com]

I saw that when I got online this morning and literally thought that I was seeing things. Because nothing else could fail just that hard.

[ninamonkey.livejournal.com]

I don't get angry often, but when I do...

I saw that picture and I had no words. None. The problem is, it honestly sounds like the artist was a Hillary support who wanted to get in his or her subtle "digs" before Obama becomes President.

This cover was not a mistake. As sad as that is, someone wanted this cover out and in the media, for one reason or another. The editorial staff at the New Yorker is smart enough to know when something is good, or when something is trashy. They knew.

Either that, or the New Yorker is so far behind race relations that they make the Klan look like a Girl Scout troop.

*FAIL.*

[winterweathered.livejournal.com]

GROSS.

[calger459.livejournal.com]

They were satiring all the rumors and bullshit about Osama being Muslim and every other "non-patriotic" thing under the sun ('cause apparently to be a "real" American you have to be white and Christian, who knew!). They were NOT making a statement on the Obamas themselves.

[apocalypsos.livejournal.com]

Yes, I get that. The problem is that it doesn't present those who believe everything in this picture as deserving of scorn like actual satire. It just presents the image, not that the people who believe in the image are dumbasses.

[calger459.livejournal.com]

Fair enough, however as I'm artist I'm sitting here trying to think HOW I would have conveyed that visually in a way that would actually read coherently to the viewer. The illustration's title "Politics of Fear" was I believe meant to provide that sort of subtext. I think though a lot of people didn't bother looking at the title and thinking about what it meant in relation to the picture. They just looked at the illustration and had a knee-jerk reaction to it, assuming it was making a comment on the Obamas directly. I can see how in that way the artist failed to get across what he meant, but I'm hard pressed to think of a better way he could have done it in a single illustration. This idea probably would have worked better as a satirical comic strip.

[budclare.livejournal.com]

They could have at least had the decency to show the Obamas eating babies. Then at least it'd have an obscure reference to giggle at.

[callmesyd.livejournal.com]

As another artist, I think it would have been pretty simple: draw the cover itself as an illustration being presented to a O'Reilly, McCain, or any one of a number of people.

Unfortunately, the artist didn't think of that, and now he's going to be getting a loooooot of shit. Happens to the best of us, sadly.

[starfishofelves.livejournal.com]

There are, though, people in the world who think Colbert's for real.

Ugh, seriously. I know a girl who adores Colbert because he is, like, so Republican. When she told me, I laughed and asked her if she was kidding, she got all patronizing and was like, "Come on, do you ever even watch his show?" At which point I gave up.

I had no idea people could actually be so oblivious.

[voodoolimbo.livejournal.com]

The failboat has failed!

[notrafficlights.livejournal.com]

I'm guessing they're satirising the Right's obsession with painting Obama as the antichrist or something?

[wyldemusick.livejournal.com]

That's pretty much a Davros and the Daleks level of FAIL. I didn't know there was a level beyond EPIC, but, whoo, one shot, one kill there.

Ye gods.

[shadow-phoenix2.livejournal.com]

I just found this satire, as well, which might interest you?
http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=598891
Just thought I'd link incase you were interested/hadn't seen it before. ^_^