New Yorker magazine alert thread

i can see both sides of the "should bert & ernie be appropriated like this" coin enough that what really annoys me about the new yorker cover is that a) they're admiring a shot of the ENTIRE supreme court and b) that the appropriating is being done by the new yorker

I realize it's not totally my place to say, but this ultimately comes off as another Thing To Be Vaguely Outraged About On The Internet

i.e. blog fodder

blfodder, as you say

imo the cartoon character (or puppet) that will retroactively be written as a "gay character" will probably be Bart Simpson, not Bert and Ernie

Like, a liberal, pro-gay rights publication celebrated a victory for gay rights with a humorous cover that may have been just like a hair off in tone and allegedly perpetuates a stereotype of gay people that almost no one, especially liberals, really has.

that people still get their news from network TV in 2013?

btw, you know who else codes as gay to me? that Neil Patrick Harris fella

what really annoys me about the new yorker cover is that a) they're admiring a shot of the ENTIRE supreme court

That aspect hadn't quite occurred to me, but I do find it weird that they're looking at a still photo superimposed on a TV screen.

what do you mean?

getting pretty deep into objections to an illustration of sesame street characters at this point, does anybody have issues with the decor, model of tv

just wait for my forthcoming gawker piece addressing exactly that

OK, I have no evidence that it's a still photo per se. But it seems like an image that would be unlikely to appear on a TV screen except as a small graphic in the corner of the screen in a news broadcast. (Obviously, it was chosen as a symbol to communicate in the easiest possible manner what the illustration is about.)

cancelling my subscription

Jesus Christ you guys

wait since this is the new yorker thread are people annoyed that people are annoyed with the cover just defensive readers?

my interpretation of the cover is that bert and ernie are anti-gay bigots. this is why they're holding onto each other in the dark, retreating from "the light" of the frightening new world that doesn't discriminate quite so much and which they don't understand. they are watching a dvd that contains a slide show of supreme court images because they no longer understand how to have fun.

lololol

Check out the comment section on the New Yorker page for a whole lot more of people taking this kinda funny, kinda sweet image way too seriously.

the inside cover is the same shot from the other side, and ernie and bert have the faces of roberts and scalia

sometimes the modern mainstream left feels like a sensitivity contest

Brave is the man who calls out this farce

newsflash: ernie pisses on bert

ernie is kind of twisted

Sorry to keep this going, but does anyone else imagine muppet dick would just be a completely featureless felt protrusion?

theyre old now yes, they go to russian river summers and palm springs winters

i guess it didn't occur to freddie they might be sexless because they're on a show for children

OK, I have no evidence that it's a still photo per se. But it seems like an image that would be unlikely to appear on a TV screen except as a small graphic in the corner of the screen in a news broadcast. (Obviously, it was chosen as a symbol to communicate in the easiest possible manner what the illustration is about.)

― Murder in the Rue McClanahan (jaymc), Friday, June 28, 2013 9:45 PM (1 hour ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Newsflash: It is not uncommon for things in a CARTOON to be not exactly like they would appear in real life (if "tv screen" can count as real life in the first place).

Offense to gay community is deeply felt

Newsflash: It is not uncommon for things in a CARTOON to be not exactly like they would appear in real life (if "tv screen" can count as real life in the first place).

I *get* that, it's just a weird thing when you think about it: they're looking at a photo of the Supreme Court justices? This image might work better:
http://newnownext.mtvnimages.com/2013/03/supreme-court-gay-marriage.jpg

(Though you might have to make it more clear that that's the Supreme Court building.)

I think Bert and Ernie were used to represent the rainbow colors in the cartoon. Grey vs color, the rainbow colors being shown by Bert and Ernie.

lmao

I don't think it's odd it depicts a portrait of the whole of the SCOTUS tbh. Reducing this (to a cartoon) noone thinks of "5 to 4 SC outcome". No, the headlines are: SC offs NOMA. SC is the people portrayed on the telly. Makes perfect sense to me.

it's not that people are looking for a reason to be offended, they're looking to explain why they find the cover cutesy and trite. and it shouldn't be hard to understand why some people might be particularly offended by a cutesy, trite cover concerning this subject.

I'm Ernie btw

xp

i think this cover is kinda great

it's not that people are looking for a reason to be offended

― da croupier, Saturday, June 29, 2013 12:12 AM (22 seconds ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

You think this person isn't looking for a reason to be offended?

that person is looking to attract pageviews for slate.com afaict

otm

i'm referring to the people on this thread and people like tyler coates http://flavorwire.com/401071/the-new-yorkers-bert-and-ernie-doma-cover-is-infantilizing-and-offensive

also slate is slate

and to be clear, i'm not saying it's wrong to think it's fine and cute and whatevs. but complaining that oversensitive liberals can't take a joke is never a good look.

Generally I agree. But between "Blurred Lines" and now this, this has felt like the week of people getting upset over absolutely nothing.

it's the same cutesy & kinda trite sense of humor as every other new yorker cover

http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/culture/130311_2013_p465.jpg

This is subtly a perfect distillation of how your average liberal views the Pope: sexless, harmless, inoffensive, childish, silly, and ultimately mere fodder for the condescending entertainment of straight people.

i like the new yorker's whimsical covers. "the borowitz report" on the other hand is the least funny thing in the world, not just of comedy things but of all things.

article about the iron mine in guinea was kind of the perfect new yorker article

Louis Menand on the Voting Rights Act.