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

151–160 of 196 posts

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

#151

Post by raxxorrax »

NE2z2T9qi wrote: post #27

I think this piece is a great example of smug, establishment romanticism which grossly overvalues form over function. A political cartoon hasn't made me laugh, think deeply, or--most importantly--change my worldview in years. It's the most self-satisfied, pretentious, and outdated medium I know of. The author's notion that the loss of political cartoons is a serious loss of visual political culture is a self-absorbed…

I withhold any opinion until I see a XKCD that expresses my feelings towards your statement.

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

#152

Post by jlawson »

seventhtiger wrote: post #144
hestefisk wrote: post #12

This reminds me of the famous Muhammad drawings in 2005 in Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten (JP). Back then they were seen as a defence of free speech and our democratic rights, a way of mocking the draconian regimes of the Middle East. Had it happened again today, the Puritan twittersphere would have been all over it and JP would likely have had to follow same route as NYT. Very sad.

What would happen to a couple of Muslims burning a US flag in some parts of the US? I won't jump straight to murder, but I'll say physical violence would be highly likely. This is not whataboutism. I'm not saying it's ok because it happens elsewhere. I'm just arguing against the portrayal of it as a uniquely Muslim problem. I think we would be able to find some icon or symbol in every culture which some subset of peo…

I think this just shows you believe some ugly stereotypes about 'some parts of the US'.

Your example is wholly imaginary, where Muslims murdering people for mocking or criticizing their religion has many many examples in modern and old times.

Theo van Gogh got his head cut off. Ayaan Hirsi Ali lives in hiding with armed guards. So do Robert Spencer and Salman Rushdie. Charlie Hebdo staffers slaughtered. Draw Mohammed contests in Texas attacked by armed terrorists. And on and on.

And this stuff isn't happening in rural Pakistan. It happens in places with very few Muslims. They travel to Connor these crimes. In your analogy it would be like a hillbilly southerner traveling to Morocco to mutilate someone who insulted George Washington. It would be like that happening consistently over and over for decades.

There's no comparison. Islam is unique in this.

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

#153

Post by seventhtiger »

jlawson wrote: post #152
seventhtiger wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What would happen to a couple of Muslims burning a US flag in some parts of the US? I won't jump straight to murder, but I'll say physical violence would be highly likely. This is not whataboutism. I'm not saying it's ok because it happens elsewhere. I'm just arguing against the portrayal of it as a uniquely Muslim problem. I think we would be able to find some icon or symbol in every culture which some subset of peo…

I think this just shows you believe some ugly stereotypes about 'some parts of the US'. Your example is wholly imaginary, where Muslims murdering people for mocking or criticizing their religion has many many examples in modern and old times. Theo van Gogh got his head cut off. Ayaan Hirsi Ali lives in hiding with armed guards. So do Robert Spencer and Salman Rushdie. Charlie Hebdo staffers slaughtered. Draw Mohammed…

I didn't have specific parts of the US or stereotypes in mind. It is well documented that hate crimes against Muslims happen in the US including murder. This is well documented. It's not a stretch to think a hate crime would happen in response to a flag burning, since they already happen unprovoked.

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

#154

Post by zimpenfish »

sonnyblarney wrote: post #87
hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If anything, that's the thing I hate most about Twitter. A journalist who wants to write a story with a particular angle can easily find tons of supporting viewpoints on Twitter, and usually at least a few of these are somewhat clever or snarky. So the journalist writes the article and then uses these examples from Twitter to show that "the masses" agree, or are equally outraged as the author. Since when do we start…

This might be the worst trick used by media outlets to portend there's a 'movement afoot' or 'what most people' think when neither are true. "People are saying XYZ" - because some random person on Twitter said it. "People believe this" - again, some random Tweet in support. They're creating narrative, which is definitely the opposite of news, and it's way beyond 'Editorial' i.e. 'the opinion of the author'. Politicia…

> "People are saying XYZ" - because some random person on Twitter said it.

But it was ever thus - except now there is at least a random person on Twitter saying it rather than it being made up in the newsroom.

> They're creating narrative

Literally every media since the dawn of time has done this - it is, I think, impossible to write an objective report of something -that people will then pay for-. (cf Jim Sterling's parodic objective reviews on YouTube as an example.)

> I'm tired of having to read everything with a huge dose of cynicism

That was always required for any media. It always will be. People buy/found media companies to further their agenda; not out of the goodness of their heart.

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

#155

Post by rawTruthHurts »

mevile wrote: post #23

Political cartoons are, in my opinion, reductionist garbage that fail to take into consideration nuance and complexity and context. The caricature that inflate the size of ears and chins and lips and noses is not dignifying and doesn't add any value to whatever argument is being made, and can sometimes even be racist. There's no rebuttal to a political cartoon, there's no dialogue. They're cheap and easy to make and…

"Are they convincing you of anything or are they just making you mad?" They give me a reasonable overview of the zeitgeist.

"... fail to take into consideration nuance and complexity and contex" It's up to you to do your homework and dig into such specifics.

"... lips and noses is not dignifying ..." Not that conflicting written political pieces tend to dignify the opposing side either. Now, if caricatures make your heart bleed, you're very entitled to your opinion.

"There's no rebuttal to a political cartoon, there's no dialogue" Not until the internet came up and made communication 2-way.

"They're cheap and easy to make and easy to consume and are just as easy to forget." Like pretty much 90% of nowadays "journalism". Maybe the word should be "infotainment"

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

#156

Post by raxxorrax »

mistermann wrote: post #135
mratzloff wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Psilocybin may provide somewhat of a reasonable approximation of this at appropriate dosages.

Lobotomy would help too.

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

#157

Post by probably_wrong »

jimmaswell wrote: post #63
enraged_camel wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>>A political cartoon hasn't made me laugh or think deeply in years. This probably says more about you than about political cartoons as a medium. Is it possible that you have become so used to over-the-top memes and shallow animated shows with instant-gratification "satire" that you have lost the ability (and/or patience) to pause and ponder the subtler, many-layered messages underneath traditional cartoons?

Could you post one of these alleged subtle and multi-layered political cartoons, with a short analysis?

I learned last month that there's a Pulitzer price in Editorial Cartooning. This is the winner of 2019 (and the runner ups), so I'd say that's as good as it gets: https://www.pulitzer.org/winners/darrin-bell-freelancer

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

#158

Post by Chris2048 »

trehalose wrote: post #43
781 wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mocking is still legal in the West. But not for long. Mocking anything but white men/Christianity creates huge uproar today. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/comic-riffs/wp/2018/09/1...

Mocking white men/Christianity doesn't create huge uproar? Hasn't there been a huge uproar about a "War on Christmas" for years where people get mad when baristas say "happy holidays"? Hard to believe that something so innocuous could generate Christian outrage but mocking Christianity couldn't.

Yeah, they get mad. But how many lawsuits are there? How many incidents of violence?

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

#159

Post by Chris2048 »

seventhtiger wrote: post #153
jlawson wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this just shows you believe some ugly stereotypes about 'some parts of the US'. Your example is wholly imaginary, where Muslims murdering people for mocking or criticizing their religion has many many examples in modern and old times. Theo van Gogh got his head cut off. Ayaan Hirsi Ali lives in hiding with armed guards. So do Robert Spencer and Salman Rushdie. Charlie Hebdo staffers slaughtered. Draw Mohammed…

I didn't have specific parts of the US or stereotypes in mind. It is well documented that hate crimes against Muslims happen in the US including murder. This is well documented. It's not a stretch to think a hate crime would happen in response to a flag burning, since they already happen unprovoked.

What is the cause of those crimes? You are switching from incidents of violence arising entirely from some specific incident, to those cause by sentiment, e.g. 9/11 caused an increase in anti-Muslim violence.
Post reply on HN