Editorial Cartoonists get schlonged
Prepare your eyes for offensive liberal attack! BAM! POW! ZING!
Can you still see? Are your eyes watering from anger and disgust at the liberal media attacking Ted Cruz with their filthy, dirty pictures, scrawled by perverted cartoonists? They should be, this is horribly not funny!
Now personally I find the cartoon kinda lame, kinda limp, like whoever was expecting to find some funny cartooned attack against trump (using a little “t” for a man with little real hair) or maybe something about the democrats and Bernie Sanders reading Hillary’s e-mails or whining about not getting any news coverage. But naw, we got this stinker about an actually kinda funny tv ad from Ted Cruz.
naw. naw i ain’t buying it. don’t confuse me for a card carrying liberal, or conservative, okay? but this isn’t horrible here, the joke is supposed to be that Ted Cruz made a commercial for his presidential campaign, one in which he reads his daughters made up conservative themed christmas stories like “How Obamacare stole christmas” and “the grinch who lost her e-mails” among others. It ends with if you don’t like the books you probably hate christmas….and AMERICA!
It’s funny, it’s a joke, those aren’t real books. are they? well, anyways, that is what the cartoon above is referencing, saying that Ted Cruz is an organ grinder, with his wee monkeys dancing for our amusement, using his daughters for political gain, what nerve! what gall! The kids should be left out of politics, but since he brought them into a political advertisement they are fair game for editorial cartoons, is the argument used by the cartoonist Ann Telnaes.
Now this was in the washington post (WaPo if you’re hip to reading news from a few days ago) yesterday, then promptly the cartoon was removed from the site and in it’s place we get an also not-really-funny statement from the editor
“ Editor’s note from Fred Hiatt: It’s generally been the policy of our editorial section to leave children out of it. I failed to look at this cartoon before it was published. I understand why Ann thought an exception to the policy was warranted in this case, but I do not agree.”
This. This is why newspapers are shedding readers and filling their webpages with auto-play adverts. This is cowardice. We still have free speech, or at least we are supposed to, and that is meant to protect speech that is ugly. Or unfunny as in this case. I understand the cartoon was originally animated, but now is reduced to this static, unfunny image, not that animated monkeys jumping around would make it funny. But what does this editor do? He failed to look at the cartoon before it was posted and now feels that it shouldn’t besmirch the great character of the washington post, so it must be removed.
Pathetic. We have an editor removing controversial content rather than let it die on the webpage, thus ensuring that it gets talked about more. In place of the cartoon we get a snidely admittance that he did not do his job until he started getting e-mails complaining about depicting Ted Cruz’s kids as monkeys.
The editors statement here is pretty suspect, “ It’s generally been the policy of our editorial section to leave children out of it” what does that mean? Does that mean any mention of politicians kids is right out? That cannot be what it means because we have numerous WaPo (i’m hip remember?) articles about president Obama’s two daughters and turkey pardoning and some gop staffer who criticized them for looking bored. This story was all over, numerous follow ups and comments. But the policy of the editorial section is to leave the children out of it?
Bull sheet. It’s a cartoon see, a little unimportant drawing, a comic, it’s not important. And that’s why it was taken down, not cause the editor was worried about Ted Cruz’s kids being portrayed as monkeys, naw the editor knew that cartoons aren’t important here in America. If this had been a written piece, an opinion piece saying “I think Ted Cruz is wrong to use his two daughters in a political ad, it makes me think they are nothing but trained monkeys!” And people would have lined up on their respective sides to debate the opinion piece, but nobody would have said we need to remove the whole piece. But a cartoon? Heck that’s kids stuff, nobody cares about cartoons and silly drawings.
Not sure what the answer here is, maybe if it was a stronger cartoon i would be more angry, if the cartoon was saying more. But wait, maybe it is? Maybe this is something that Ann Telnaes has plotted out, maybe she wanted to give Ted Cruz some extra holiday internet clicks? And the only way to do that with her powers of drawing monkeys would be to make a editorial cartoon that would likely get taken down, as she knows her editor is a spineless wreck of a man, one who will throw his journalists under the bus rather than stand by them in controversy. Is that possible? Could a silly drawing of a guy in a santa suit with some monkeys have that much scheming and plotting behind it?
I want to think so. But. I live in the real world too.
Thanks for readin.