Newsweek editor: Our Palin cover wasn’t sexist

posted at 5:19 pm on November 17, 2009 by Allahpundit

Translation, for all the “Spinal Tap” fans out there: What’s wrong with being sexy?

“We chose the most interesting image available to us to illustrate the theme of the cover, which is what we always try to do,” Meacham said, in a statement provided to Huffington Post. “We apply the same test to photographs of any public figure, male or female: does the image convey what we are saying? That is a gender-neutral standard.”…

Finally, as for the issue of whether the image is sexist, a source at Newsweek relays that the art and photo directors responsible for the cover (which was decided upon last Thursday) are both women.

Follow the link to HuffPo for a half-hearted defense of how the cover “conveys” what Newsweek was saying. Really? The point of Meacham’s and Thomas’s pieces was that she’s leading a dead-end right-wing populist movement that’s widening the ideological divide at a moment when America needs it to narrow. The point of the cover is … what? Sarah Palin likes to jog? Sarah Palin is in damned fine shape? Sarah Palin showing some leg might help sell a few more magazines? Where’s the “conveyance” in that? There’s nothing necessarily sexist about noting her physical appeal, even in the course of an otherwise serious political critique, but as a standalone image to introduce a bunch of pieces that dump on her, the subtext seems to be that she’s not worth taking seriously — and that her good looks symbolize that. I know women on both sides of the aisle who disprove that theory.

Sarahcuda lowered the boom on Newsweek last night via Facebook, as you’ve surely already seen, but David Brody was first out of the box among the people I read on the right to rip them for the cover, writing, “Where’s the sexy photo of Mitt Romney? Why not a picture of Tim Pawlenty with an unbuttoned shirt relaxing on a couch in the Twin Cities?” Fair enough, but have Mitt or T-Paw actually posed for any sexy photos? I wrote at the time that the Runner’s World pic first came out that it was essentially a check-me-out photo showing off what great shape she was in thanks to running, even after five kids. That doesn’t excuse Newsweek exploiting it for political purposes, but if the media’s as unfair to her as she claims — and it often is — then she had to know that eventually someone would use that photo in an unkind way. Or … was that the point? Bait her critics with a picture they couldn’t resist and then sit back as they walk into the trap?

Update: Then again, Sarahcuda did famously do an interview in front of a turkey slaughterhouse, producing a clip that run in a loop on MSNBC for about a week. Which means (a) this probably wasn’t a trap and (b) she really needs to think ahead when doing photo ops/shoots about her enemies might use the pics against her.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

How do you solve a problem like Newsweak: Bankruptcy

WordsMatter on November 17, 2009 at 6:58 PM

Which means (a) this probably wasn’t a trap and (b) she really needs to think ahead when doing photo ops/shoots about her enemies might use the pics against her.

Kinda like, you know, we really should have thought ahead that building two buildings 110 stories AND jet liners was probably a bad idea because… well, someone might use them against us.

I am so sick and tired of this, well, she asked for it because she just looked too darned good for her own good argument. I’m not a femi-Nazi. Never have been. But this lose-lose arguments–if you’re Hillary, you lose because you’re not feminine ENOUGH, and if you’re Sarah, you lose because you’re too feminine… are making me see where the feminists were coming from!

UnderstandingisPower on November 17, 2009 at 7:05 PM

The mindset behind the cover picture choice is easy, it’s designed to belittle her. But the title reference is weird. Maybe the Newsweek editors just like the idea of the calling Palin a problem. However, if the title recalls the original “Sound of Music,” it boomerangs on the editors, because all of those associations are very positive.

Loxodonta on November 17, 2009 at 7:06 PM

sniff the glove!

ginaswo on November 17, 2009 at 7:09 PM

I’d rather see Sarah wrapped in the flag she loves than to see Ayers stepping on the flag he hates.

beachgirlusa on November 17, 2009 at 6:48 PM

————————————————

You’d probably rather see her spit on or burn a flag she loves rather than see someone who hates it do the same thing…so what?

Equivocate away, but it doesn’t change the fact that she’s disrespecting the flag in both pictures. And almost no one here has said a word with respect to the first.

skylark on November 17, 2009 at 7:10 PM

I still can’t figure out why Meacham is still the editor of Newsweek. One would think the top guy would be interested in actually selling magazines, but Meacham is apparently blissfully unconcerned about that. He basically sucks at his job.

WarEagle01 on November 17, 2009 at 7:11 PM

If the problem is that Newsweek used a cheesecake photo of Palin, there has to be at least some problem with Palin agreeing to do a cheesecake photo. The knock on Palin from the beginning has been that she’s all image and no substance. How can Newsweek make that point any better than with a photo that has no deeper significance than, “gee, don’t I have great legs?”

RightOFLeft on November 17, 2009 at 5:51 PM

Did you miss the fact that the photo was taken for Runner’s World? How exactly is she supposed to dress for a feature on her running routines? Would it be “cheesecake” for her to pose with her rifle on the front of a hunting magazine? Now there’s a cover I’d like to see. :)

The question is what possible context the photo has to a supposedly serious news magazine portrayal.

evergreen on November 17, 2009 at 7:11 PM

You’d probably rather see her spit on or burn a flag she loves rather than see someone who hates it do the same thing…so what?

Funny how you presume to know what I probably like or don’t like.

beachgirlusa on November 17, 2009 at 7:18 PM

Loxodonta on November 17, 2009 at 6:36 PM

Excellent point. Also, G.B.S. was a Socialist, and I’ve always thought that despite M.F.L’s undeniable charm, on another level Eliza Doolittle represented his desire for a superior being to educate the uncouth masses.

Buy Danish on November 17, 2009 at 7:18 PM

Excellent point. Also, G.B.S. was a Socialist, and I’ve always thought that despite M.F.L’s undeniable charm, on another level Eliza Doolittle represented his desire for a superior being to educate the uncouth masses.

Buy Danish on November 17, 2009 at 7:18 PM

LOL – yeah, “excellent point,” except that the song he’s talking about is from The Sound of Music, not My Fair lady, and the writers were Rodgers & Hammerstein, and the writer of the songs for MFL wasn’t GBS either.

But still – excellent point!

Proud Rino on November 17, 2009 at 7:22 PM

Yes the image does match the theme of the advocacy journalism which Newsweak pushed. What do (liberals) do about a problem like Sarah? They sexualize her, push the idea that she is a bimbo. That is why they chose the picture. I’m only surprised that they didn’t choose the photoshopped bikini pic. That was probably passed over, not because it is fake, but because it would expose their motives. It wasn’t subtle enough.

w3bgrrl on November 17, 2009 at 7:23 PM

“Funny how you presume to know what I probably like or don’t like.”

beachgirlusa on November 17, 2009 at 7:18 PM
———————————–

You’re right. You just appear to like to engage in nonsequiturs.

skylark on November 17, 2009 at 7:23 PM

Did you miss the fact that the photo was taken for Runner’s World?

Doesn’t mean that Newsweek can’t use it for their magazine, especially if they paid Runner’s World for the right to use the photo.

Palin shouldn’t have taken the photo, plain and simple, if she was going to have an issue with it being used. Given the positive publicity she got from the Oprah interview and the Walters interview, she should have just refrained from comment on the magazine instead of burning off the positive press she was finally generating.

She (or her handlers) have no real case of public relations…while she may have the 20-30% sewn up on her side, she will continue to have difficulty getting the middle to support her in a general election or even in a primary against other conservatives like Huckabee or Pawlenty.

Dickie Dunn on November 17, 2009 at 7:24 PM

Instead of case, I meant “She (or her handlers) have no real skill in public relations.”

Dickie Dunn on November 17, 2009 at 7:25 PM

On the title…Maria in The Sound of Music was a nun hanging out with a lot of little kids.

I don’t think it’s hard to imagine that’s how Newsweek’s editors see Sarah Palin.

John on November 17, 2009 at 7:29 PM

But still – excellent point!

Proud Rino on November 17, 2009 at 7:22 PM

Yes.
Good point, except for all those ‘fact’ thingies that randomly fell everywhere except within your comment.

Tom_OC on November 17, 2009 at 7:34 PM

Wait, you mean, posing in an attractive way is bad?

So, like, Obama showing off his svelte blue jeans on his plane during the campaign, that was unwise? Right? Because Newsweek might use it sometime to imply that he’s no more than a pretty face?

You may be on to something. I mean, look at how many people in the media snidely commented on his topless ocean photos last year. Clearly, even though those photos were not planned- much like all those shots of Palin’s legs- the media used them in a manner unbefitting of a serious political personality.

Or they might.

Any moment now.

/sarcasm

Jewels on November 17, 2009 at 7:39 PM

Dickie Dunn on November 17, 2009 at 7:24 PM

At the same time, Obama should never have his photo taken while playing golf and Bush should never have had his photo taken while bike riding and Reagan should never have had his photo taken working on a ranch.

Because posing in a way that implies you might be an active, healthy individual is unwise. For a politician.

Jewels on November 17, 2009 at 7:43 PM

skylark on November 17, 2009 at 7:10 PM

Well, allow me to say a word.

As a former United States Marine who has been serving full-time with a Guard unit since very shortly after 9/11, Ms. Palin’s very minor flag-etiquette faux-pas are entirely forgivable as I know that she stands, with her heart in the only right place, four-square behind me, her son the Marine, our flag, my rag, and you.

Shut up about it now.

Doorgunner on November 17, 2009 at 7:46 PM

I will not get into the sexism debate, but I’m sure that the women of the leftist elite gasped, “OH MY GOD, SHE WEARS A SKIRT”, and can…
Why are they upset? She is everything that they will never be, she has taken all of their individual attributes, and rolled them up into one sweet package. Smart, articulate, quick on her feet, pretty, successful, motivated, and desirable. Her down side? She’s never had an abortion, pro gun, and a Conservative, they hate her for that.
They call her white trash, yet they seem to forget the trailer park President that they admire so. The left has gone so far to the left, that nothing but a complete “F UP” is good enough for them, now we have it, ain’t it great?

Keep it up Sarah, we love you, you are all woman, you are all American, don’t sink to their level, just keep shoving their heads farther up their collective asses. At some point they will poke out their eyes while brushing their teeth.

M-14 2go on November 17, 2009 at 8:00 PM

LOL – yeah, “excellent point,” except that the song he’s talking about is from The Sound of Music, not My Fair lady, and the writers were Rodgers & Hammerstein, and the writer of the songs for MFL wasn’t GBS either.
Proud Rino on November 17, 2009 at 7:22 PM

Gotcha. Except that your point that the writer of the song for MFL wasn’t GBS is irrelevant. The writer of the book upon which TSOM was based was not Rogers and Hammerstein. So? All that matters is that the song was not from My Fair Lady. Happy?

Buy Danish on November 17, 2009 at 8:02 PM

The Newsweek editor needs to get hit on the side of the head with a bag of hammers… Several times… Several bags…

Khun Joe on November 17, 2009 at 8:04 PM

At the same time, Obama should never have his photo taken while playing golf and Bush should never have had his photo taken while bike riding and Reagan should never have had his photo taken working on a ranch.

Because posing in a way that implies you might be an active, healthy individual is unwise. For a politician.

Jewels on November 17, 2009 at 7:43 PM

Jewels, I liked the pictures of Reagan working a chainsaw, Bush pulling out brush on his ranch, and Obama hanging curtains. They all seem to show an accurate portrayal of the men.

M-14 2go on November 17, 2009 at 8:06 PM

Did you miss the fact that the photo was taken for Runner’s World? How exactly is she supposed to dress for a feature on her running routines? Would it be “cheesecake” for her to pose with her rifle on the front of a hunting magazine? Now there’s a cover I’d like to see. :)

The question is what possible context the photo has to a supposedly serious news magazine portrayal.

evergreen on November 17, 2009 at 7:11 PM

The context is irrelevant. It’s a cheesecake photo. She’s even doing the classic “swimsuit portion of the event” pose.

RightOFLeft on November 17, 2009 at 8:18 PM

I just thumbed through Palin’s book, looked at the pictures, read a few passages, so ordinary, but so amazing.

WordsMatter on November 17, 2009 at 8:23 PM

Doorgunner on November 17, 2009 at 7:46 PM

Right, “allow you to say a word” but anyone who disagrees can just “shut up about it now.”

Said without a hint of self-irony.

skylark on November 17, 2009 at 8:25 PM

None at all.

Doorgunner on November 17, 2009 at 8:30 PM

None at all.

Doorgunner on November 17, 2009 at 8:30 PM

Exactly.

skylark on November 17, 2009 at 8:35 PM

Hey, get this. The latest to rag on Newsweek is:

MediaMatters.
.
http://mediamatters.org/blog/200911170027

Since most here won’t bother to click on anything to do with that website, I think maybe a quote is in order.

Then, for no apparent reason, illustrating Christopher Hitchens’ piece on “Palin’s base appeal,” Newsweek ran a picture of this disgusting Sarah Palin-as-a-slutty-schoolgirl doll:

And:

Newsweek offers some interesting analysis of Palin and her appeal in its November 23 issue. Unfortunately, its sexist treatment of Palin’s physical appearance distracts from any legitimate arguments the magazine and its contributors wish to make.

.
RWG (just made Memeorandum, so maybe Allah will pick up on it :-)

RWG on November 17, 2009 at 8:41 PM

None at all.

Doorgunner on November 17, 2009 at 8:30 PM

Exactly.

skylark on November 17, 2009 at 8:35 PM

Kid,

I’m not hard to find.
I’m in the airport, waiting to deploy for the X time.
I’m at the cemetery, burying a friend, again.
I’m at the restaurant, with multiple generations of my family, engaged in really uncool displays of affection.
I’m at the recruitment office, waiting for your contempt to be scrawled across my door.

I’m always available; irony free.

It’s my rag. I earned the right to say who can use it for what. If you don’t like it, step to any one of us and say so.

Please, step right up.

Doorgunner on November 17, 2009 at 8:50 PM

However, if the title recalls the original “Sound of Music,” it boomerangs on the editors, because all of those associations are very positive.

Loxodonta on November 17, 2009 at 7:06 PM

I feel like this is evidence that, under all the popular hatred of Sarah is the truth that few liberals recognize or would ever admit to themselves: on a gut level, even they find her appealing. Even her enemies admit that she’s naturally charismatic, and most people are susceptible to charisma even if their knowledge (real or imagined) of the person’s quality is negative.

This is what makes me think that maybe, just maybe, she’s not so destroyed as to be unable to make a comeback…. under it all, people want to like her – it’s just not socially acceptable yet. Maybe that’ll change, but only time will tell.

Animator Girl on November 17, 2009 at 9:00 PM

Being in that kind of shape after being pregnant with 5 kids is more than Obama has accomplished.

bitsy on November 17, 2009 at 9:11 PM

I hear many reasons why the Lefty media hate Palin. Here is the one 3 letter word that is behind the hate from liberals…GOD!. That is why they hate Palin, that is why they hated Bush, that is why they hated Cheney, because they all admit to a higher authority. There I said it.

royzer on November 17, 2009 at 9:32 PM

Oh sure, sure, putting a woman in shorts on the cover of Newsweek is sexist, yeah yeah, but she is one great looking woman with a fantastic shape, and she should take pride in the gifts God gave her and which she so obviously takes good care of. Maureen Dowd and Gloria Steinem could only wish for such gifts. Maybe then they wouldn’t be so bitter and man-hating.

MADgirl91 on November 17, 2009 at 9:46 PM

I loved that slaughterhouse interview.

Nice to see a pioneer woman for once who doesn’t go into denial about where her turkey dinner comes from.

Sackett on November 17, 2009 at 9:50 PM

Have you ever seen an interview with Jon Meacham? From time to time he appeared with Tim Russert as a panel member on Meet the Press.

Jon Meacham is less than impressive … to put it mildly. The man has a distorted sense of self-importance regarding his intellect and station in life. It would be comical if it wasn’t so pathetic.

jdflorida on November 17, 2009 at 10:15 PM

Please, step right up.

Doorgunner on November 17, 2009 at 8:50 PM

Why? You’re doing such a great job parodying yourself.

skylark on November 17, 2009 at 10:19 PM

Yeah. Even the women see for what you are. Scrape along, scrape along.

Doorgunner on November 17, 2009 at 10:43 PM

Even the women see for what you are.

Doorgunner on November 17, 2009 at 10:43 PM

I am a woman.

skylark on November 17, 2009 at 10:48 PM

Doorgunner

Had I known this person was a troll I wouldn’t have replied at all, I never knowingly post to them.

beachgirlusa on November 17, 2009 at 10:53 PM

Had I known this person was a troll …
beachgirlusa on November 17, 2009 at 10:53 PM

Right. Whatever makes you feel better.

skylark on November 17, 2009 at 10:56 PM

Two entire posts from AP on this topic, and not a single mention of the fact that Palin is leaning on the American flag, draped over a barstool as if it’s a couch afghan. Only one commenter in each thread has been the least bit discomfited by it.

You think this is an isolated incident of Ms. Palin showing disrespect for the flag?

Think again.

skylark on November 17, 2009 at 6:34 PM

Equivocate away, but it doesn’t change the fact that she’s disrespecting the flag in both pictures. And almost no one here has said a word with respect to the first.

skylark on November 17, 2009 at 7:10 PM

So the atheletes that run with the flag at the Olympics and wrap themselves in it to show their pride are disrespectful?
And then you think that excuses you to be disrespectful to a soldier here?

Since you are repeating talking points from your mother ship–Puff Ho, go back and report that you didn’t complete your mission–you are a troll, and not a very good one at that.
Jealousy does not become you, and you seriously need to getalife!

lovingmyUSA on November 17, 2009 at 11:05 PM

lovingmyUSA:

What does the Flag Code say about wearing a flag?

And between myself and my immediate family – including one currently serving in Iraq – I can match that fella’s silly bragging points and more. And let me tell you, not a single vet in my family would ever use their status to act like such a blowhard.

skylark on November 17, 2009 at 11:11 PM

“We chose the most interesting image available to us to illustrate the theme of the cover, which is what we always try to do,” Meacham said

Well, if interesting is their criteria for selecting a cover photo…. if someone snuck a camera into the White House and snapped a picture of Obama sitting on the can, that would be a very “interesting” photograph, but does anyone think Newsweek would put it on their front cover?

Frigging liars. I hope they fail.

UltimateBob on November 17, 2009 at 11:16 PM

Update: Then again, Sarahcuda did famously do an interview in front of a turkey slaughterhouse, producing a clip that run in a loop on MSNBC for about a week. Which means (a) this probably wasn’t a trap and (b) she really needs to think ahead when doing photo ops/shoots about her enemies might use the pics against her.

Dumbest crap I’ve ever read.
Let’s preemptively emblanden.

Stephen M on November 17, 2009 at 11:22 PM

Enblanden?

Stephen M on November 17, 2009 at 11:23 PM

Enbetatize?

Stephen M on November 17, 2009 at 11:25 PM

She is the one who posed for the running magazine using the flag as a drop cloth .

borntoraisehogs on November 17, 2009 at 11:26 PM

Update: Then again, Sarahcuda did famously do an interview in front of a turkey slaughterhouse, producing a clip that run in a loop on MSNBC for about a week. Which means (a) this probably wasn’t a trap and (b) she really needs to think ahead when doing photo ops/shoots about her enemies might use the pics against her.

Yes, and next time she’s at a carnival, eating ice cream, she needs to worry if a picture of her eating ice cream will be put on the cover of Newsweek for an article about her populist appeal to the right-wing base will make her come off as a simple hick eating junk food at a carnival. Wha?

Those pictures were for Runner’s World! About Running! She’s dressed in running gear! So she shouldn’t have gotten those pictures taken at all because some partisan rag would eventually use her Runner’s World pictures to symbolize her political/social relevancy? Yeah? Is this advice for Sarah Palin only or everyone in politics? Come on AP. Stop letting the mainstream nutter media dictate what we should be allowed to do. Running pictures for cryin’ out loud. Can’t have that!!!

Dongemaharu on November 17, 2009 at 11:31 PM

the subtext seems to be that she’s not worth taking seriously — and that her good looks symbolize that. I know women on both sides of the aisle who disprove that theory.

I just figured out who Allah thinks is gorgeous and yet deserves to be taken seriously – MeggieMac!

misterpeasea on November 18, 2009 at 12:50 AM

So,when is NEWSWEEK going to break out the pink spotlights?Gender neutral my a$$.

DDT on November 18, 2009 at 3:03 AM

skylark on November 17, 2009 at 11:11 PM

You’re really trying too hard. There is no breach of flag etiquette in either photo.

hawkdriver on November 18, 2009 at 3:59 AM

skylark on November 17, 2009 at 11:11 PM

PS, if you can do a side by side with the pictures from the Chicago magazine with Bill Ayers purposely stepping on the flag in an alley, full of garbage and explain to me the intent of each persons use of the flag, I might take your pitiful attempt to sidetrack the conversation here more seriously. But you can’t. Ayers was demonstrating what he thought of the flag and America. Palin simply had a flag in the photo not hung or displayed. It’s obvious that it’s placement is temporary. I’m sure after the photo, the flag in a Palin home would have been moved to a a pole to be displayed or folded correctly and placed in a private and respectful place. Bill Ayers I’m sure, tossed his in a dumpster in the alley.

The cover “was” sexist.
Palin didn’t disrespect the flag in the photo.

hawkdriver on November 18, 2009 at 4:34 AM

Yes, and next time she’s at a carnival, eating ice cream, she needs to worry if a picture of her eating ice cream will be put on the cover of Newsweek for an article about her populist appeal to the right-wing base will make her come off as a simple hick eating junk food at a carnival. Wha?

Those pictures were for Runner’s World! About Running! She’s dressed in running gear! So she shouldn’t have gotten those pictures taken at all because some partisan rag would eventually use her Runner’s World pictures to symbolize her
political/social relevancy? Yeah? Is this advice for Sarah Palin only or everyone in politics? Come on AP. Stop letting the mainstream nutter media dictate what we should be allowed to do. Running pictures for cryin’ out loud. Can’t have that!!!

Dongemaharu on November 17, 2009 at 11:31 PM

+1

It’s not so much the Runner’s world picture itself (as the picture shows her in – surprise – running clothes & running shoes), it’s the fact that a news & politics magazine would use any picture from someone’s off-hours or leisure activities deliberately.

The real problem is with the photographer’s organization that supposedly put this picture up for sale. When Sarah does a photo shoot for a magazine of her choice, is it not possible to make sure those photos are not put into the for-sale pile, for God’s sake? That to me is an interesting story.

RD on November 18, 2009 at 6:17 AM

The editors also claim that the magazine isn’t biased in favor of liberals.

MarkTheGreat on November 18, 2009 at 8:52 AM

You want a sexy pic of Hillary, you got it.

SmallGovtGuy on November 18, 2009 at 10:13 AM

SmallGovtGuy on November 18, 2009 at 10:15 AM

Allahpundit has officially jumped the shark with this post.

Sharke on November 18, 2009 at 10:29 AM

Translation, for all the “Spinal Tap” fans out there: What’s wrong with being sexy?

Newsweek Editor: You think this is sexist? You should have seen the cover they wanted to go with.

I assure you, they weren’t running shorts she was wearing.

JohnGalt23 on November 18, 2009 at 10:31 AM

I mean come on, it’s not as if she was bent over and looking over he shoulder with her finger on her bottom lip. She’s no Barney Frank.

Sharke on November 18, 2009 at 10:34 AM

Boy, you just have to wonder at their “logic” and how far up their a$$ets their heads are. Amazing!

mozalf on November 18, 2009 at 10:43 AM

The simple fact is that in a mag like Runner’s World, you’re expected to show the legs. Just as you would show the abs in Ab World or whatever.

It’s a runner’s thing.

It was completely appropriate, nay [i]expected[/i] in the contect of Runner’s World.

In WeakNews…not so much.

BlueStateBilly on November 18, 2009 at 10:43 AM

Even Media Matters had a problem with this. Which is probably why Newsweek bothered to respond at all.

There are a lot of legitimate reasons to criticize Sarah Palin, her new book, and her policies, but you don’t have to stoop to sexism to do it. Newsweek’s November 23 issue, however, does just that by publishing on its cover a photo of Palin in short running shorts and a fitted top, leaning against the American flag. Making matters worse is the equally offensive headline Newsweek editors chose to run alongside the photo — “How Do You Solve a Problem like Sarah?” — presumably a reference to the Sound of Music song, “Maria,” in which nuns fret about “how” to “solve a problem like Maria,” a “girl” who “climbs trees” and whose “dress has a tear.”

RadClown on November 18, 2009 at 10:54 AM

(b) she really needs to think ahead when doing photo ops/shoots about her enemies might use the pics against her.

Sure, but that’s all because of the double standard. Obama has pictures without his shirt on, but what national magazine picked those up as their cover before dumping on him? It was the exact opposite in fact. People used those pictures, but only to give their readers something to drool on while reading about how dreamy the man is.

We can forgive Palin for forgetting the double standard for a moment.

Esthier on November 18, 2009 at 10:58 AM

And gosh darn it if someone who works on a Farm, who doesn’t give a crap about the media.. needing to get the work done… goes and takes the turkey to flip and flop around! LMFAO…

upinak on November 17, 2009 at 6:02 PM

HA HA! Don’t bring a filming crew to my place around spring or branding time.
Bad spring calving = lots of dead stuff.
Branding time= bloody castration activities
Hee Hee! I’m such a savage. LOL!

Badger40 on November 18, 2009 at 11:00 AM

The fact that I want to sleep with Sarah Palin isn’t going to make me LESS likely to vote for her.

leereyno on November 18, 2009 at 11:22 AM

You’re really trying too hard. There is no breach of flag etiquette in either photo.

hawkdriver on November 18, 2009 at 3:59 AM

I’m sure you’d say the same thing if it was a Democrat posing.

skylark on November 18, 2009 at 1:15 PM

hawkdriver on November 18, 2009 at 4:34 AM

I’m pretty sure Palin intentionally leaned on a flag tossed over a bar stool. And wrapped herself in one.

skylark on November 18, 2009 at 1:18 PM

As if women can’t be sexist? Are they kidding? Do you know how many friends of mine said flat out that a woman with children has no business running for public office? LIBERAL women said that to me. Some women are more sexist than men because they CAN be. It’s like the “N” word if you are black. Women are allowed to rag the hell out of other women with impunity

a. Because men like to watch
and
b. Because many women have hella low self esteem and running another woman into the dirt makes them feel better. You think two women at Newsweek didn’t have a sexist agenda when they picked that photo? Dude. Come on. We frick’n OWN the art of insult.

BrideOfRove on November 18, 2009 at 1:28 PM

You’d be amazed the mental blocks lib males get past after midnight.

Liam on November 17, 2009 at 6:02 PM

I’m sure they’re busy giving themselves their nighlty estrogen shots during that time.
Which must be why we have so many beta males in this country.

Badger40 on November 18, 2009 at 2:18 PM

…the subtext seems to be that she’s not worth taking seriously — and that her good looks symbolize that.

I think this is correct. I don’t see it as sexist. I think that if Newsweek wanted to portray a politician as a pretty face with little behind it, they’d do the same whether it was a man or a woman. I mean Time Magazine used a jawline-jutting cover photo of Mitt Romney to say that he “looked like a President”, but there might not be much behind it.

So I don’t see it as sexist, but I think Palin-defenders do have a case to make that it was a photo designed to paint her in a particular way – a way they would surely consider to be unfair.

orange on November 18, 2009 at 2:40 PM

The funny thing is that more people will see this on websites discussing it than will ever read Snoozeweak.

RegularJoe on November 18, 2009 at 6:07 PM

I still can’t figure out why Meacham is still the editor of Newsweek. One would think the top guy would be interested in actually selling magazines, but Meacham is apparently blissfully unconcerned about that. He basically sucks at his job.
`
WarEagle01 on November 17, 2009 at 7:11 PM

`

The funny thing is that more people will see this on websites discussing it than will ever read Snoozeweak.
`
RegularJoe on November 18, 2009 at 6:07 PM

`
`
`
Heck, after 15 years of Meacham calling many or most of the shots, circulation and revenue had declined so pitifully that Meacham changed the mag’s goal – no longer would they attempt to be a mass-appeal national news magazine, but they would cater to a smaller, higher-income (leftist) audience. Voila! Declining numbers suddenly become not a bug, but a feature!
`
Newsweak lowered their ad guarantees (the amount of paid circulation they would guarantee to advertisers – any less and they begin rebating) from 3.1 million in early 2008 to 1.5 million now. And they claim it’s working! After losing an average of over $4 million per month for the first half of 2009, 3rd quarter losses are down to “only” $1.3 million per month – PLUS they foresee making a profit, perhaps as early as 2011!
`
There is little doubt of Joe’s point: surely many times as many people have seen this cover by the controversy on the internet than will ever see it by actually buying the magazine. Considering that only drooling leftist Palin-haters would even be slightly interested in the magazine as it currently publishes, and that many of them have been exposed to it through this whole brouhaha, it may turn out to be good marketing for Newsweak after all.

Adjoran on November 19, 2009 at 3:23 AM

She looks fantastic– what’s the “Problem”?

leftnomore on November 19, 2009 at 1:08 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3