« BYOB - October 16 | Main | I Am Shiva, The God Of Death »

October 16, 2007

Rader Does Vanity Fair

vfradar.jpg

I learned about the Radar politcal mock of the Vanity Fair Tom Ford/Hollywood cover on The View, of all places. And besides my surprise that the women on the show seemed geniunely concerned that the cover crossed some line, I was doubly surprised that they couldn't show the Vanity Fair cover because they would be charged "too much" by Vanity Fair.

The show, I guess, is not under the news division, but still... so odd to me that you can't show a picture of a magazine cover under fair use on an entertainment show. That's scarier in the "corporations own everything" way than anything else I've heard lately.

And have we so lowered our ability to engage in satirical discourse that this cover is actually offensive... even if it is on the front page of a magazine that leads the way in slimy snark whenever they can? Or is it that the Vanity Fair cover had so little impact in the first place outside our media bubble that the play on it doesn't feel like satire at all?

Posted by poland at October 16, 2007 10:26 AM

Comments

Ha ha! Me thinks that the only line crossed there was from funny to hilarious!

Great cover!

Posted by: The Carpetmuncher [TypeKey Profile Page] at October 16, 2007 10:54 AM

Okay David, 2 questions:

First why were you watching The View.

And secondly, why were you watching The View?

Posted by: a1amoeba [TypeKey Profile Page] at October 16, 2007 12:14 PM

The same reason everyone watches The View -- that Whoopi Goldberg is smokin' hot.

Posted by: Joe Leydon [TypeKey Profile Page] at October 16, 2007 12:15 PM

David watches a lot of daytime television. His more passionate blog entries often follow hard on the heels of particularly torrid episodes of THE BOLD AND THE BEAUTIFUL.

Posted by: Ian Sinclair [TypeKey Profile Page] at October 16, 2007 12:33 PM

I have explained this before... I was a fan of the chat segment even before Rosie. I rarely watch the show past that point. But when I sit down to the computer with a up of coffee, it is often the first thing to come up on the HD/DVR after a quick check of CNN to make sure the world is still moving slowly towards self-destruction and not speeding up that morning.

It is the same for me as watching a bit of O'Reilly or The Daily Show or listening to Randi Rhoades or Michael Medved... I don't tend to get factual insight, but I do get a whiff of some of the perspectives out there, more often talking points than not.

What amazes me this morning, driving around LA, is the male, right wing, Jewish support of Ann Coulter. Frankly, I don't care if she wants me perfected, but any Jew who doesn't chose to see that for what it is seems to be bending towards ideology rather than whatever degree of offense is appropriate.

Posted by: David Poland [TypeKey Profile Page] at October 16, 2007 01:19 PM

Well, either that or they just want to bang a blond shiksa.

Posted by: Joe Leydon [TypeKey Profile Page] at October 16, 2007 01:23 PM

I've noticed that support for Coulter too, David, from a lot of my right-wing family members (we're all Jews). I really don't understand it, the closest I can come up with is the Repubs policy of having close ties with Israel, but Coulter is in her own freaking world. I think all the attention that is focused on her is exactly what she wants and we all play into it by expressing our shock at whatever incendiary thing she says.

But I do think it's important to get a wide variety of perspectives; that way, it's easier to be suspect of everyone and cynical about everything.

Posted by: Noah [TypeKey Profile Page] at October 16, 2007 01:24 PM

"What amazes me this morning, driving around LA, is the male, right wing, Jewish support of Ann Coulter."

I guess if you look like, say, Andrea Dworkin, and spout a bunch of spongiform-brained rubbish, you're a loony tunes. But if you look like Ann Coulter, Jews start throwing themselves in the ovens for you. What's so amazing about that?

Posted by: Hallick [TypeKey Profile Page] at October 16, 2007 02:28 PM

Ouch.

Posted by: David Poland [TypeKey Profile Page] at October 16, 2007 03:26 PM

Ouch is right. The over metaphors are beyond uncalled for.

Posted by: The Carpetmuncher [TypeKey Profile Page] at October 16, 2007 03:40 PM

I love fold-out covers :)mmmm Scarlett

Posted by: doug r [TypeKey Profile Page] at October 16, 2007 07:38 PM

Coulter is a about as mook as a mook can get. How anyone can treat her as a focal point of any moment is beyond me. Seriously... the affect on her voice is enough to make me want to ignore everything that she says.

Posted by: IOIOIOI [TypeKey Profile Page] at October 16, 2007 09:25 PM

One of the liberal bloggers wrote an interesting piece in which he said Coulter is not as bad as Michelle Malkin--the difference being that Coulter is more of a performance artist who just wants to shock people in order to sell books and land speaking engagements, whereas Malkin really is a true believer; he says he could never imagine Coulter stalking the Frost family the way Malkin did.

And while all of us Jewboys want blonde shiksahs, we do prefer them to be born female.

Posted by: Cadavra [TypeKey Profile Page] at October 16, 2007 11:39 PM

The link to the post that Cadavra is talking about is here - http://obsidianwings.blogs.com/obsidian_wings/2007/10/why-coulter-is-.html

I read that post a couple of days ago too and thought it was the most insightful thing I have read on either woman in ages. It only leaves out one point - both are bat shit insane

Posted by: GayAsXmas [TypeKey Profile Page] at October 17, 2007 01:32 AM

So Hilary is the nominee of the three?

Posted by: KamikazeCamelV2.0 [TypeKey Profile Page] at October 17, 2007 06:24 AM

Post a comment

Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)


Remember me?