Obama and the New Yorker

By now, everyone's seen the New Yorker cover with Michelle in fatigues and Barack in Muslim clothes, an American flag on the fire, and a picture of Osama bin Laden over the fireplace. I understand, I think, the New Yorker's position that it's a satire over how the far right sees the Obamas. Accurate or not, this extreme form of satire should not be on the cover of a magazine.

I am all in favor of a free press, but posting such a picture without explanation on a magazine known for its careful research and quality writing is not helpful but harmful. Not only is it harmful to the Obamas, it is harmful to the people of the United States. It keeps stereotypes alive and promulgates hate. If it were posted in a story discussing the issue, fine, it would (hopefully) stimulate discussion. As used, however, it's just bad.

A big reason for that is, obviously, bias. Anyone who thinks Obama is a Muslim radical working with bin Laden, and/or thinks Michelle Obama is a terrorist or militant, is going to believe this cover proves it. Some sort of disclaimer should accompany this picture. Not that a disclaimer would keep everyone from thinking the Obamas are terrorists, but it might help those on the edge or wavering.

Satire is a two-edged sword, and it requires some open-mindedness and awareness to understand it properly. I have no idea whether anyone thought Jonathon Swift really wanted to eat children, but his satire was less biting than the New Yorker image.