tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2299265987842129559.post9075506405450911607..comments2023-03-25T08:11:23.503-04:00Comments on Doing the MOST: New Yorker...this doesn't help...Sllim Thinks Alothttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17357212221125653489noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2299265987842129559.post-60482621200634103372008-07-16T10:15:00.000-04:002008-07-16T10:15:00.000-04:00wow so the New Yorker shouldnt be under censorship...wow so the New Yorker shouldnt be under censorship...hmm It's funny they claim blacks need more personal responsibility all the time, but in a world where they media paints blacks any way they want its not a big deal? The media should also take responsibility for their actions! The arguement isnt that there shouldnt be a cartoon about Obama, but when your a major corporation with millions of readers you must have some sort of code or responsibility to up hold. I can not express how one sided the media has already been when dealing with Obama news they have painted a mental picture, and now they have literally painted a picture of what the media wants all Americans to think of Obama when they hear his name. This picture no matter then intent, was over the top, tasteless....Machine gun? Bin Laden? American flag burning? That a man cannot run for president in the US without scurrilous rumors circulating about his race, religion, sexuality, and/or patriotism is not an important issue? Somehow, I think that deserves attention, and I'd say rendering the absurdity in full color accomplishes that.I don't care how a person feels about Obama, that cartoon was in bad taste. I understand satire is designed to be offensive, but usually there is some truth to the satire, which is what makes it funny. This is just wrongFreedom Threw Healthhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03454994858697959574noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2299265987842129559.post-5891527085764573462008-07-15T18:31:00.000-04:002008-07-15T18:31:00.000-04:00I 100% agree with your criticism...but... :)Why sh...I 100% agree with your criticism...but... :)<BR/><BR/>Why should New Yorker have to censor their cover because there are a lot of stupid people in America? The media's job is not to pick sides - it is to report news and make people think. Now, usually this doesn't happen (I'm talking to you Fox and WB News). New Yorker is expanding a debate. Yes, the debate could have been done minus a controversial cover, but they are a business. And businesses need to create a stir to sell their product. I say smart people enjoy it - because I'm guessing the dumb ass folks in America don't buy/read New Yorker and, for the most part, won't even see this cover.Birth Junkyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06492854445648063584noreply@blogger.com