Not surprisingly, Barry Blitt’s illustration of Barack Obama and his wife Michelle on the July 21 New Yorker cover generated lots of blog buzz. We ran a conversation query on obama + new yorker to learn more.
So far, there have been 917 unique posts on 213 sites. Common key words repeated in the conversation include "cover" (more than half of all posts use this word) and about 40% of the posts also reference “McCain.”
What was the overall reaction by the influential bloggers? Many saw it as satire, though some thought it lacked taste. Overall, the bloggers felt this was typical fare for the New Yorker.
That said, some influential conversation threads are clearly troubled by the cover's implications. With many Americans trying to sort fact from fiction on both Presidential candidates, quite a few influencers and their readers are upset with the timing and nature of such a cover. The comments stemming from one of the top posts in the conversation (coming from 2 Political Junkies, the 13th overall most influential site in the obama + new yorker conversation) have deemed the cover blatant American racism, while others say it’s a bigger reflection of harbored fears.
The most influential post was from a mainstream media blog, CBS’ Media Web, on July 16. It calls the negative backlash predictable and ridiculous, saying this is clearly a use of sarcasm to mock the “irrational prejudices that plenty of Americans harbor about the Obamas.” Columnist Jon Friedman expresses surprise that more media outlets never rallied around the New Yorker, and posits the heated criticism of the cover from conservatives reflect the group's extreme dislike of two of the most visible and successful symbols of liberal America - the New Yorker and Obama himself.
Book-focused blog The Millions weighed in with the 5th most influential post on the subject, stating that the illustration was not funny, just offensive and dumb.
Our take? Cover art is a way for magazines to sell. We all know the trials of print media these days, and from that position, Blitt’s illustration did exactly what it was supposed to do: spark conversation and, likely, sell more magazines.
