"The New Yorker says it's latest cover "satirizes the use of scare tactics and misinformation in the Presidential election to derail Barack Obama's campaign." The Obama campaign says it's "tasteless and offensive". (The McCain campaign concurs, of course.) The Obama campaign is right to be concerned, though not for the reasons they've expressed. In your correspondent's opinion, the cover is neither tasteless nor offensive, and most anyone who reads the New Yorker will recognise it as satire. (A rather funny and effective satire if you ask me.)

But what about those who do not read the magazine? Their first exposure to the cover is unlikely to come when walking by a newsstand. Rather, they will likely see it or hear about it within the context of their favourite TV news programme or radio show. These shows, many of which are meant to be the butt of the joke, may not characterise the cover in the same way the New Yorker does. The cartoon "satirises Mr Obama's muslim heritage, his patriotism problems and his fiery wife", some conservative news host might say. Others will use it to justify smears that actually are tasteless and offensive. "If the liberal New Yorker can get away with it, why can't I?" they'll argue.

I imagine this is why the Obama campaign opted for such a simple response. Sure they recognise the cover as satire, but they also recognise the potential for others to use satire as cover for more ill-willed attacks." (Economist.com, July 14, 2008)