The New Yorker Magazine Obama cover for the July 21, 2008 issue was released yesterday to controversy and uproar.

The cover by Barry Blitt, called “The Politics of Fear,” shows Michelle and Barack Obama depicted as the worst of the prejudiced, smearing characterizations that have dogged them over the course of the campaign: Michelle Obama as a revolutionary in military fatigues, packing AK-47 and ammo; her husband dressed like the Muslim he is stubbornly accused of being. Both of them stand in the Oval Office, with a portrait of Osama bin Laden behind them over a fireplace, in which an American flag burns. Not very subtle.

Some are not alarmed — Clarence Page, longtime Chicago Tribune columnist (and African-American) said the cover was “quite within the normal bounds of journalism” — but not everyone sees it that way. It’s been described as “offensive” and “trash” and “disgusting” and “just as bad as Fox News.”

Source: David Remnick On That New Yorker Cover: It’s Satire, Meant To Target “Distortions And Misconceptions And Prejudices” About Obama

It’s got everything incendiary except a vest bomb. Which is what should telegraph to most people that it’s way over-the-top and, therefore, satire.

But politicians don’t like satire because it’s subject to differing interpretations.

Obama declined comment today, seeking not to elevate its importance. But, in a move that certainly drew more attention to a commercial decision with no hope of changing it, his campaign issued a statement by Bill Burton which Mike Allen of Politico.com reported as, ““The New Yorker may think, as one of their staff explained to us, that their cover is a satirical lampoon of the caricature Sen. Obama’s right-wing critics have tried to create. But most readers will see it as tasteless and offensive. And we agree.”

The McCain campaign immediately e-mailed a similar statement from Tucker Bounds: “We completely agree with the Obama campaign, it’s tasteless and offensive.”

Of course, the McCain people must say that, despite some staff no doubt chuckling behind closed doors over their opponent’s new challenge. That’s the problem with satire. A lot of people won’t get the joke. Or won’t want to. And will use it for non-humorous purposes, which isn’t the New Yorker’s fault.

Source: Is the New Yorker’s Muslim Obama cover incendiary or satire?

Nico Pitney interviewed the artist Barry Blitt, who created the controversial New Yorker Obama cover.

Via email, I asked him to respond to those who feel that his work was offensive, and to explain his own personal feelings about the Obamas. Here’s what he wrote:

I think the idea that the Obamas are branded as unpatriotic [let alone as terrorists] in certain sectors is preposterous. It seemed to me that depicting the concept would show it as the fear-mongering ridiculousness that it is.

And in retrospect, given the outcry, is he glad he made the art?

“Retrospect? Outcry?” he wrote. “The magazine just came out ten minutes ago, at least give me a few days to decide whether to regret it or not…”

Source: Barry Blitt Defends His New Yorker Cover Art Of Obama

What gets lost here in the controversy is the fascinating article that accompanies the controversial New Yorker Barack Obama Michelle Obama cover:   Making It: How Chicago shaped Obama.

And this vintage 1990s photograph from Barack Obama’s first state senate campaign.

Photo credit: Marc PoKempner

New Yorker has undercut all of this with an over-the-top “satirical” controversial cover that will be discussed and debated and debated and debated…..

But as with the endless attacks the Barack Obama campaign has already endured, we think his best response is the Jay-Z “Dirt off Your Shoulders” response he previously gave back in April 2008 during the primary campaign against Hillary Clinton.



New Yorker Magazine Obama Cover Stirs Controversy