NOTE: BagNewsNotes is now located at http://www.bagnewsnotes.com/. Please update your bookmarks.

You will be automatically redirected in a few seconds...

« Marked As Allies | Main | Your Turn: Eight Bucks Every Three Weeks »

Nov 16, 2006

The New Place To Be

Time-06-Election  Time-New-Place-To-Be
(TIME vs. BAG: click for full effect)

The BAG readership often cites how America has no news magazines -- that the originals were grabbed up long ago at the corner of Hollywood and Kitsch.  At key points, however -- when the national attention span pauses to focus on one significant, and usually dramatic thing -- these cultural billboards still have their place and impact on the political narrative.

(Or a negative impact --when they turn a political earthquake into nothing.)

If you haven't seen it around the 'sphere, take a look at the cover TIME did after the Republican's stampeded in '94.  And, if you have seen it, look at it again.  In nine days, I haven't seen any stormin' donkeys, any steamrollers, any locomotives, have you?

Out of anger and solace, The BAG took a remedial crack at the TIME cover -- two cracks, in fact.  You can view the other version on the sister-post at Huffington.

Regarding this TIME-ly excuse for an election cover, by the way, Greg Sargent has an interesting critique (TIME Magazine's Cover Touts Victorious "Center" -- But Matching Story Doesn't Assert Anything Like That) of both the illustration and the lead article.  Regarding TIME's thesis, Greg says:

Dems didn't win simply because their candidates were moderates or centrists. They won because they had good candidates -- some of them moderate, and some of them quite liberal.  ...And again, nowhere in the piece does Klein describe the election as a victory for the center.

Regarding the visual, Sargent's take (which I find a quite plausible in a world where quality is Job 2 ... after the sacred maxim "Get There First") is that TIME created the cover before it actually knew the election results!

(illustration/Arthur Hochstein.  November 20, 2006.  Cover.  time.com)

Comments

Almost certainly not the intent here, but equating the two strongly suggests that the universe is red.

Putting the two next to each other also draws a whole lot of focus on "TIME" since it's occluded in one, and not in the other.

I'd like to say that the Republicans were defeated because they espouse poorly thought out policy, or were (individually) corrupt, but that's not the truth. The truth is that there are two shitty options, and, for some bizrre reason, the country keeps taking bites of one or the other, and then spitting most of it out in surprise.

I agree, everyone in the media has been ignoring the obvious. The Republicans got voted out because they were either corrupt, racist, or just plain no good. The bums got throwed out. If the blue disk and the red disk are 50 percent transparent so that where they overlap it creates purple, why then don't we see the TIME logo showing through the disk? Just a consistancy observation on my part. Anyway I like The Bags design better. Maybe a third cover design would be the big blue disk fully shown on the cover with a very little portion of the red disk showing (disappearing at the bottom), appearing to be knocked out of the picture by the blue disk.

"In nine days, I haven't seen any stormin' donkeys, any steamrollers, any locomotives, have you?"

Why should we expect to? In 1994, Republicans picked up 8 senate seats and 54 house seats. In 2006, Democrats picked up 5 senate seats and 29 house seats.

Of course the graphic is misleading, but I don't think a stampede graphic is warranted either.

This is usually less of a problem where people have a more honest take on the journalism their country has to offer. People know the political ideology of the mainstream mags in other countries. Time's ideology is right of center. That's why there was no angry donkey.

But I like the BAG's blue version. The Earth triumphing over Mars. The UN wins. Womanhood.

(Not that I'm joining in on any of the triumphalism of the past week, which is why I've just been lurking since last Tuesday...)

This is a bigger shift than 94. This is a bigger shift than most people think.

But it isn't about stampeding donkeys. It's not about anger, but a quiet coming to the senses of a majority of people in this country. And it will continue.


America is growing up.

What the heck is this, a Republican pregnacy test?

Michael ~ Madame LOVES your design ;-)

...slams a 20-euro note down on the table and says, "Go buy a bottle Calvados and pour everybody in the cafe a drink!

And you (!) when is MonsieurGrouchy gonna stop acting like such a pompous ass man?!!"


sheeeez !


The country is not in any mood to have a steamroller party. The country wants peace and quiet - more peace than quiet. The country wants to recuperate from 6 years of high anxiety. Forget colors, is not about color. Is about saving what is "left" from all that "right" which didn't do us any good.

I think the best TIME cover would show a blue Pac-Man disk with its mouth open, facing right, and about to swallow a smaller red disk.

I think the cover is just a plug for the fantasy, "bipartisanship" Congress. Wheeling and dealing will be very intense at the "center." And, the corruption will still be there, on both sides of the aisle until we have campaign reform, eliminating all money other than government financing of elections. That's another big fantasy.

"The truth is that there are two shitty options, and, for some bizrre reason, the country keeps taking bites of one or the other, and then spitting most of it out in surprise."

Well said, noname!

There are two options, and neither one is necessarily "shitty" (a pretty non-descriptive, useless adjective), but the corruption of each party is due to money and where it comes from. There are honorable arguments to be made on both sides (not including the subversion of the Republican Party by the current ideologues), and traditional Democratic Party ideals still offer more to the Common Good. It is that citizens do not follow the activities of their elected oficials except at election time. This makes for bad governance and makes us all partly responsible for this mess. Don't forget: we are the government.

There often is a discrepancy between the content of an article, and the accompanying title or graphics. I suspect that is because the journalists who write the article have one political slant, but the editors and publishers have a different slant.

But since most people don't read the entire article, it is the person who controls the title and graphics that controls the impressions given to the general public.

That, by the way, is one reason that "headline news" is so disturbing. It makes it much easier to spread propaganda.

In case you haven't read about it, the 'far right' is Anarchism and the 'far left' is Communism. Since everyone is convinced that big government doesn't work (nods to Harry Browne), and nobody wants to grow their own food or give up their 'freedom' (a.k.a. "crap we don't need"), then no matter who wins, it ends up somewhere in 'the middle'. You pandering scribe wannabees always think that you have some kind of Oracle insight to what the reality of politics is all about, yet you have no idea what the Periodic Table is, which dozens of countries we are currently raping for their resources, or what the hell Peak Oil is all about (it's the PRICE, Stupid!).
The 'center' is a place where some people get their Useless Crap by buying all the resources of the world, and others get their Useless Crap by sending their children to kill people and break things to sell them to the former. The Mode Du Jour just ends up being overconsumption, regardless of how many or which talking heads get to skim the advertising proceeds.
If you want Change, keep it in your pocket. Your dollar is your only vote and the machines don't count. Or, as someone said on theDailyReckoning, "your dollar isn't real, and the machines don't count".

In my opinion this election proved amongst other things that it is past time to reverse the Supreme Court's assessment that Money equals Speech and realize that similarily to how separate was by definition not equal -- Money CONFOUNDS Free Speech. It is now time for Public Campaign Financing for all legitimate candidates.

Whether our Federal Officeholders are Hard Right-Wingers or Ultra Left Wing all of them should beholding only to voters. No longer should anyone's campaign contributions

Up until recently the GOP managed to offset their message and numerical weakness with plenty of cash. Then the Democratic Party started selling out and they got enough cash to compensate. Now all this cash has biten the GOP and hard.

For those of you who favor a third party -- what do you think will happen when this third party decides it wants to win a few times -- they'll take the cash and viola.

For those who favor term limits public financing offers a better alternative. No longer would incumbents have such large war chest advantages though they retain the other advantages/disadvantages of incumbency. If an incumbent can win against an equally financially endowed opponent, they deserve to stay.

For those who favor Republicans the corruption seen in the last Congress and it's electorial effect surely shows the value of Public Campaign financing.

For those to mourn the demise of the New Deal Democratic party this approach would allow Democrats to return to their roots while still having a chance to get their message out.

The point is that this will help fix the Electoral System by removing the corrosive corrupting influence of large amounts of cash from politics.

Regardless of your political persuasion, Our representatives should beholding only to American voters.

Auntigrav - the opposite of communism is fascism.

"the 'far right' is Anarchism "

What?

auntiegrav: "In case you haven't read about it, the 'far right' is Anarchism and the 'far left' is Communism."

I beg to differ....the opposite of anarchism is totalitarianism, of which communism is one possible variation.

*Newsstand* magazines such as TIME compete for our fickle gaze, which lasts 2.5 to 4 seconds per cover. By using simple shapes and primary colors on this cover, TIME is trying to lure newsstand browsers to *its* feature story on the midterm election results by promising readers a pared-down, unmessy, elementary (literally) explanation.

Either that, or TIME is trying to appeal to a kindergarten-level readership.

For a somewhat interesting if disjointed NewsHour transcript from 2000 about TIME's deliberate effort to change the "look" (and content) of print "news," scroll down to the subhead "Competition is fierce":
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/media/jan-june00/magazines_5-15.html

After reading it, you'll see that it's not The BAG readership's imagination that "America has no news magazines -- that the originals were grabbed up long ago at the corner of Hollywood and Kitsch."

And if you're REALLY interested in the evolution of the print edition of TIME (another redesign is due out in January), kick back in confidence with this admission:

"Magazines are evolving to a kick-back medium from a news medium," said Joe Mandese, editor of MediaPost in New York, an online and print trade publication. "Time is saying with the change that it's not a start-your-week publication, it's a kick-back, over-the-weekend publication, and Time.com is for news."

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/10/business/media/10mag.html?ex=1164258000&en=0a5797088918407b&ei=5070

Yes, even TIME considers itself a dinosaur. It's almost *extinct* as a news publication. Too bad the red and blue bubbles didn't blot out T-I-M-E altogether.

"a political earthquake"

aw come on, it pains me to the roots of my teeth to listen to the naivete of you americans who choose to pretend that anything is going to be different under the democrats. Give me a break..
When did it ever make a real difference.
The whole american political system; the red/blue dichotomy is a joke, an illusion, two sides of the same coin. Switch and bait. youre being conned and duped and robbed and made look stupid, and every four years the rest of the world watches you nearly get it , nearly.. but never quite.

maybe in another six years when the democrats are still in Iraq, and everything else is still the same but a different colour...
maybe then you'll get it.

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo

My Other Accounts

Twitter
Blog powered by TypePad
Member since 07/2003