Benefiting at work from Brain Based Insights

Good for you, Ellen!

It always amazes me how (let's give them the benefit of the doubt) smart people can do such publicly stupid things! But one thing I've observed: A person's (or organization's) own arrogance trumps intelligence every time, if they're not careful!

A sobering warning, yes?

Thanks for stopping by Bob. Even more shocking is how New Yorker top staff are showing how out of touch they are with their readers. When confronted by top media officials their chief editor is shrugging this disaster off saying, "The American people will get it."

They are right in one sense -- we do get it -- far more than they realize and we see its dangerous barbs to our communities.

From the growing responses out there, I am quite sure readers are getting it though -- and feeling unsure that New Yorker staff is seeing the depth of their arrogance in not apologizing for this cover.

Hopefully subscription cancellations will show how much readers really do get what they need to see.

Nuff said...

I don't know that I agree with you. Maybe it's because I'm mixed race. Maybe because I just don't see the cover as hate fueled. When I saw it I realized it was a satire take on all of the internet rumours I'd been reassuring some of white friends and family (interesting that only they were asking), were not true. Equally true is that only white friends and family were outraged by it. I live in Santa Cruz, CA, known for the city government banning nukes within the city limits and other progressive actions, and though I'm a lifelong liberal, I'm frequently surprised by how easily white people here take offense on behalf of minorities. People have been run out of town for saying the "wrong" thing. As an Obama supporter, I think he was right to take a "whatever" attitude towards it and shrug it off as a stupid satire whose publication is a free speech issue. It's definitely your subscription to cancel, but for me it's basically a tempest in a teapot. Seriously, do you think any of the people who believe that Barack is a not so secret muslim terrorist supporter read "The New Yorker"? Sometimes I think it's true that we liberals have a larger sense of outrage than we do humour.

Greetings Robyn McIntyre, thanks for stopping by and I am glad to meet you and to hear your side of the story that has so many people looking to answers.

The cartoon shows the future first lady sporting an AK47, the American flag burning in their presence, and a couple running to lead our country - are portrayed as mere killers and terrorists.

This incidious imagery sets a dangerous precedent for ethical leaders who may already be far too quick to cut down, dominate or attack. I'll be doing another post on so-called satire -- and where it comes from as well as leads us, from a brain based perspective.

However, I respect your take Robyn - and especially the wonderful tone and thoughtful reflections you bring to discussions. Since I do not know you, I was thinking it would be fun to chat further about the consequences to our communities of such jaded imagery.

It allows people to disagree without attacking the other and portraying him as a terrorist.

Thanks for showing your side - and while we disagree, I respect your views and am glad you shared it with such fine articulation, that models respect for others. Would that New Yorker staff would do the same.

Hi, to make sure readers know that I am the Robyn who works with Ellen, I decided to respond to this post, too.

I sense that people not a part of the African American Community and who have a sense of social justice felt outrage. Satire puts people down, no matter what form it comes in. Some people see it as humor while others do not. Often it is used to exert power over others.

My feeling is that sensitive folks have been appalled by the whispers going around that put several false ideas out to the public, such as that Barak is actually a secret Islamic terrorist. Many voters simply want a campaign free of the bashing and dirty tricks associated with past political elections and primaries.

I know people who think these things are true about Barak and Michelle Obama and have bumper stickers that are quite ugly. Their fear, that led them to put such bumper stickers on their cars is now endorsed by The New Yorker, whether or not that was their original intent. I didn't want to see unfounded rumors graphically caricatured on The New Yorker. I agree with both Barak Obama's original assessment and John McCain's that this was offensive.

Dr. Robyn McMaster, what an honor to work with you and to learn from your gentle wisdom daily! I plan to create another post -- showing the hidden dangers of what we callously call satire. When we look at its depth -- we see the loaded triggers that lurk inside waiting for the next victim.

It's often generated out of jealousy for people who do better than we do. It attempts to put down what we'd do better to value -- and lifting up what diminishes us all.

Good tone is the opposite and it begins with each of us. As Jim says, we have come a good distance, and have a way to go! What do you think?

Hi Ellen, the New Yorker is a heavy read and perhaps their readers understand the satire. But to protray the Obama family that way knowing that many people still think he is a follower of Islam, stinks. There is a plot somewhere.

Thanks for your insights -- as always keenly stated Jim. Sadder too is the fact that we lose our sensibilities at time to miss thoughtless innuendos hurled under the guise of "satire.".

Interesting that there are so many takes on this issue. But I still say the "other foot" test is the best way to judge. Suppose a conservative publication had published this cover. Would your reactions have been the same?

Hi Dr. Weber,

I can certainly understand the outrage with regards to this particular issue. I have to wonder where all the outrage was during the primaries when the images depicted in the cover were burning up the political blogosphere and even some mainstream media. I was offended by this cover but knew right away what it was referencing and understood that it was more about the media than it was Mr. and Mrs. Obmama.

The catch 22 with art - controversial art in particular - is that the intent is often to be provocative and elicit an emotional response. Hopefully the emotion is tempered by reflection on the message. I'm a big fan of moving beyond the initial offensive (especially if the offense is an artistic means to an end) to examine deeper messages.