Offensive, provocative, neo-nazi, scandalous, gross, sick, pathetic...
These are just some of words that stormed though the media after the New Yorker Obama cover:
It caused a lot of commotion. Cartoons are usually humorous and ironic and they should to make people think, contribute to debate, they also play a huge role in shaping the public opinion. They are often the mirror of society showing us how ridicule we can be and make us open our eyes and acknowledge it.
The New Yorker cover caused a lot of commotion in media. Why? It was taken too literally. David Remnick from The New Yorker calls the cover for satire that was meant to target distortions, misconceptions and prejudices" about Obama.
People didn't understand the message behind the cartoon and took it literary accusing The New Yorker Times for going after attention and higher readership.
Was the message too sophisticated? Was the message really too offensive. It is just not OK that we try desperately to be politically correct. We've become so straight forward in the way we are and communicate that we aren't able anymore to decode more subtle messages. Are we really no longer able to look below the surface? It seems we've forgotten what cartoons are for. How can we keep our political life and perception healthy if we can't look at it ironically any longer. Satire helped through years to fight against stupidity and backwardness. Satire tells the truth, sign away the favors and judge a man / humanity.
It made me think about cartoons published by Danish newspaper Jyllands Posten that were supposed to contribute to the debate regarding criticism of Islam and self-censorship. They've created a huge controversy that led to dramatic and often violent protests. This should be the way to demonstrate the power of free speech. It caused hate and serious damage because protesters took the cartoons too literary. While the whole Western world defended the cartoons as the part of the Western culture and symbol of free speech. What is different with Obama cartoon this time? Why so serious?! I mean the debate should be covering the whole issue of Obama being accused of being raised by Islamic school - this where people should express their outrage, not on the New Yorker cover.
I liked Jon Stewart's take on this:
"You know what your response should've been? It's very easy: Barack Obama is in no way upset about the cartoon that depicts him as a Muslim extremist. Because you know who gets upset about cartoons? Muslim extremists! Of which Barack Obama is not. It's just a f*cking cartoon!"
video via Huffingtonpost
God save satire!
