Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The End of Political Cartoons at The New York Times

chappatte.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 196 posts

Re: The End of Political Cartoons at The New York Times

#51

Post by refurb »

benj111 wrote: post #17
mAEStro-paNDa wrote: post #8

Here's an article over the cartoon mentioned here that sparked outrage in April which led to this: https://nypost.com/2019/04/28/new-york-times-condemned-for-a...

Is it actually anti Semitic to portray a (Jewish) head of state as a (guide) dog? I'm going by the description here, rather than the actual imagery, but as described it doesn't seem to me to anti Semitic.

The sensitivity is around similar images being used by Nazi Germany to depict jews as rats, lice, etc. I can see why people see the parallels.

Re: The End of Political Cartoons at The New York Times

#52

Post by kodz4 »

eanzenberg wrote: post #34
jdoliner wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is how I see it too, things like the Covington kids create a backlash against the newsrooms that promulgate them. And NYT gave them too perfect of an opportunity when they published a remake of a Nazi propaganda comic that could easily be portrayed as antisemitic.

Correctness literally doesn't matter in the realm of politics. Only, who is the loudest and most persuasive.

More like a bias towards people with the most energy.

There are lots of loud and persuasive people around, but to stay relevant, social/news media selects for the ones that are tireless in performing their routines with robotic efficiency day in day out.

Re: The End of Political Cartoons at The New York Times

#54

Post by yellowstuff »

colechristensen wrote: post #11
dlivingston wrote: post #7

"We are in a world where moralistic mobs gather on social media and rise like a storm, falling upon newsrooms in an overwhelming blow. This requires immediate counter-measures by publishers, leaving no room for ponderation or meaningful discussions. Twitter is a place for furor, not debate. The most outraged voices tend to define the conversation, and the angry crowd follows in." This is a significant problem, not ju…

>the latest flavor of puritanical outrage For some time I have been searching for ways to express how the worst characteristics of religion people give for leaving persist widely with nonbelievers. This expresses it nicely.

"Moral panic" is probably the term you want.

Re: The End of Political Cartoons at The New York Times

#55

Post by naasking »

benj111 wrote: post #17
mAEStro-paNDa wrote: post #8

Here's an article over the cartoon mentioned here that sparked outrage in April which led to this: https://nypost.com/2019/04/28/new-york-times-condemned-for-a...

Is it actually anti Semitic to portray a (Jewish) head of state as a (guide) dog? I'm going by the description here, rather than the actual imagery, but as described it doesn't seem to me to anti Semitic.

It does play into the common anti-Semitic narrative of Jews "controlling everything".

Re: The End of Political Cartoons at The New York Times

#56

Post by mratzloff »

dlivingston wrote: post #7

"We are in a world where moralistic mobs gather on social media and rise like a storm, falling upon newsrooms in an overwhelming blow. This requires immediate counter-measures by publishers, leaving no room for ponderation or meaningful discussions. Twitter is a place for furor, not debate. The most outraged voices tend to define the conversation, and the angry crowd follows in." This is a significant problem, not ju…

I wonder how different humanity would be if anger and the fight-or-flight response could be disconnected, or the dopamine response from self-righteousness could be severed.

Re: The End of Political Cartoons at The New York Times

#57

Post by xeeeeeeeeeeenu »

kristianc wrote: post #31

> "We are in a world where moralistic mobs gather on social media and rise like a storm, falling upon newsrooms in an overwhelming blow. This requires immediate counter-measures by publishers, leaving no room for ponderation or meaningful discussions. Twitter is a place for furor, not debate. The most outraged voices tend to define the conversation, and the angry crowd follows in." It's strange, and perhaps unfortuna…

>https://jewishnews.timesofisrael.com/new-york-times-antisemi...

Criticising Israel and pro-Israel policy != antisemitism

>https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/new-york-times-trump...

I don't see how it's homophobic. The cartoon portrays Trump and Putin as lovers, supposedly to mock their alleged closeness. It doesn't attack homosexual people.

If the cartoon were portraying e.g. Merkel and Putin, in similar roles, would you call it "heterophobic" (is that a word?), or would it be perfectly acceptable?

Re: The End of Political Cartoons at The New York Times

#58

Post by naveen99 »

dlivingston wrote: post #7

"We are in a world where moralistic mobs gather on social media and rise like a storm, falling upon newsrooms in an overwhelming blow. This requires immediate counter-measures by publishers, leaving no room for ponderation or meaningful discussions. Twitter is a place for furor, not debate. The most outraged voices tend to define the conversation, and the angry crowd follows in." This is a significant problem, not ju…

I wonder if there are any interesting flame wars between emacs and vim supporters on twitter.

Re: The End of Political Cartoons at The New York Times

#59

Post by anomaloops »

eanzenberg wrote: post #34
jdoliner wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is how I see it too, things like the Covington kids create a backlash against the newsrooms that promulgate them. And NYT gave them too perfect of an opportunity when they published a remake of a Nazi propaganda comic that could easily be portrayed as antisemitic.

Correctness literally doesn't matter in the realm of politics. Only, who is the loudest and most persuasive.

As an aside, is there a latin-based term for this kind of authoritative persuasion? I want to say it's ochlocracy, but generally it's not just any kind of mob I'm thinking of, but the mob that is the loudest. Rule by the loudest voices. A magnaocracy? (not to be confused with the fantastical magocracy)

Re: The End of Political Cartoons at The New York Times

#60

Post by Chlatstibur »

nerpderp82 wrote: post #45
mAEStro-paNDa wrote: post #8

Here's an article over the cartoon mentioned here that sparked outrage in April which led to this: https://nypost.com/2019/04/28/new-york-times-condemned-for-a...

Can someone explain how the cartoon is antisemetic? Calling it such doesn't make it so. If I blend Putin into a Cassowary crossed with a Peacock would it not be apropos? Cartoons are supposed to be edgy and uncomfortable. It looks like like the NYT succumbed to the mob whipped up by the Trump administration, it meerly doesn't want the criticism.

I would recommend this article [1] that explains the background of why the cartoon is problematic.

For an analogy: Drawing Trump as a banana eating ape would not raise eyes, while drawing Obama like this undoubtedly would.

[1] https://www.tabletmag.com/jewish-arts-and-culture/285781/sov...

Post reply on HN