Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 26
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    521
    Thanks
    7
    Thanked 54 Times in 31 Posts

    Photographer Jill Greenberg Reeeeally Dislikes McCain

    She's an ardent Democrat And boy, did she let her feelings be known through her work. Here's her website (NSFW) complete with ... well, you'll see...

    edit:

    she has removed the monkey poo splash page and swapped it for something tamer.
    Last edited by jfrancis; September 13th, 2008 at 03:41 PM. Reason: one link has changed its content


  2. Hide this ad by registering as a member
  3. #2
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    521
    Thanks
    7
    Thanked 54 Times in 31 Posts
    Google news entries are building momentum

    http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&q=...num=1&ct=title

  4. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    505
    Thanks
    96
    Thanked 109 Times in 71 Posts
    ROFL. Right on.
    SSG 37

  5. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    1,353
    Thanks
    87
    Thanked 39 Times in 30 Posts
    awesome.
    i want to make stickers out of these and put them everywhere.
    muahaha

  6. #5
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Ogden Utah
    Posts
    324
    Thanks
    50
    Thanked 19 Times in 16 Posts
    ooooo, that's too awesome for words. Funny how everyone here so far has had a sense of humor and agreed with her; while everyone posting on that site has made angry, upset posts about how "immature" she behaved. THAT is true political art.

  7. #6
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Seattle "ish", Washington
    Posts
    1,050
    Thanks
    10
    Thanked 62 Times in 58 Posts
    It wasn't that she was immature as much as the fact that she was unprofessional. She used a clients setting and Time with McCain to push her own politics. Next time a client gives you a job try using it to your own gains and tint it in such a way that it costs them money, respect and credibility. Then see if you get a paycheck or more work any time soon.
    She should get blacklisted from the major mags...she just screwed her client. Some of these are kinda clever, but she should have kept them to her own photos outside the use of a clients time.
    It doesn't matter what side of the political spectrum she is on, when you are hired to to a job you do it or don't take it because of your beliefs. This kind of stuff just rubs me the wrong way. Let the politicians battle it out over there ideas, not on how bad you can make them look....jeez. "End soapbox"
    ...a perpetual plan for discovery days,where everyone can take part in "purposeless play".
    My Sketch 'em up book!!
    My Blog/portfolio site- purposelessplay.com/blog

  8. #7
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Fallingwater
    Posts
    5,081
    Thanks
    1,529
    Thanked 5,191 Times in 1,728 Posts
    A certain kind of politics feeds on the damaged ego of the aging but immature. They speak to each other by making horns over their enemies' heads and drawing mustaches on posters of those not in their tree house. Then they congratulate each other on their brilliant insight and feel important for twelve minutes.
    At least Icarus tried!


    My Process: Dead Rider Graphic Novel (Dark Horse Comics) plus oil paintings, pencils and other goodies:
    http://www.conceptart.org/forums/sho...d.php?t=101106

    My "Smilechild" Music. Plus a medley of Commercial Music Cues and a Folksy Jingle!:
    http://www.myspace.com/kevferrara

  9. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    505
    Thanks
    96
    Thanked 109 Times in 71 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by kev ferrara View Post
    A certain kind of politics feeds on the damaged ego of the aging but immature. They speak to each other by making horns over their enemies' heads and drawing mustaches on posters of those not in their tree house. Then they congratulate each other on their brilliant insight and feel important for twelve minutes.
    Oh really? Here's your post in a topic about another cover, the cover of the New Yorker where Barrack and his wife are portrayed as radical muslim terrorists. As usual though I find your baffling polarity in the political spectrum to be cringe inducing. Explain how these covers are different? If you find them to be really the same thing, the same idea (which they are, they both fall into the same category) then explain why your opinion is so different with the two?

    I thought it was hilarious, innovative and really well done. However the joke seems to have backfired. Instead of making fun of the pockets of rabid loons out there who actually believe Barack is Muslim (and some kind of Manchurian Candidate and his wife is an Angela Davis type militant black power marxist revolutionary gal and they both want to destroy America), it has demonstrated just how overly sensitive and humorless the wide eyed acolyte-waifs of The Obamessiah really are. I mean, really, even Ghandi wasn't Ghandi. Barack should not be treated like a god, he's just a politician, and politicians have always been the butt of ridicule, and quite often out and out viciousness. People should just relax.
    Last edited by Nam; September 16th, 2008 at 01:03 PM.
    SSG 37

  10. #9
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Fallingwater
    Posts
    5,081
    Thanks
    1,529
    Thanked 5,191 Times in 1,728 Posts
    The Obama cartoon cover on the New Yorker was making a joking point that was too sophisticated, not too juvenile. But it was taken to be juvenile by those who think of politics in those terms. The New Yorker is a liberal democratic paper and Barry Blitt is a liberal artist and neither could be said to be against Obama.

    The McCain photographer certainly is against McCain. And those photos aren't the least bit humorous. They seem intended to do damage. And of course photos are a lot different than cartoons. People believe photos. Cartoons... not so much. Photos in a news magazine are supposed to be documentary. There has been a breach of faith with the readers of the Atlantic who expect something resembling journalistic integrity. And many people think so, including the writer of the article she was illustrating: http://jeffreygoldberg.theatlantic.c...cain_photo.php

    The distinctions between the two covers are clear and, it seems to me, pretty obvious. One is a funny cartoon, one is a scary photograph. One is intended as commentary, the other is intended to ridicule, demonize and deceive. I'm sure you get the distinction now.

    Regardless, its the same old same old. Politics is garbage and people who take politics really seriously tend to be quite hateful people. Its more sad than outrageous.
    Last edited by kev ferrara; September 16th, 2008 at 04:25 PM.
    At least Icarus tried!


    My Process: Dead Rider Graphic Novel (Dark Horse Comics) plus oil paintings, pencils and other goodies:
    http://www.conceptart.org/forums/sho...d.php?t=101106

    My "Smilechild" Music. Plus a medley of Commercial Music Cues and a Folksy Jingle!:
    http://www.myspace.com/kevferrara

  11. The Following User Says Thank You to kev ferrara For This Useful Post:


  12. #10
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    505
    Thanks
    96
    Thanked 109 Times in 71 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by kev ferrara View Post
    The Obama cover on the New Yorker was making a joking point that was too sophisticated, not too juvenile. But it was taken to be juvenile by those who think of politics in those terms. The New Yorker is a liberal democratic paper and Barry Blitt is a liberal artist and neither could be said to be against Obama.

    The McCain photographer certainly is against McCain. And those photos aren't the least bit humorous. They seem intended to do damage. And of course photos are a lot different than cartoons. People believe photos. Cartoons... not so much.

    The distinctions between the two covers are clear and, it seems to me, pretty obvious.

    Either way, your larger assumption is also wrong. I'm not outraged by the McCain photos. I think you read too much into my post because of your past issues. The photos are just typical hardball. It sells paper on which text is printed and keeps people voting "correctly".
    Nice bullshit. You're lapping up the attack from the New Yorker because it's a more 'highbrow' magazine (my ass) and because you have a chubby for McCain. 'Too sophisticated', okay, portraying a politician AND his wife as muslim radicals is sophisticated. I'm sorry, I guess I have no taste.

    I also didn't ask for a distinction between the authors of the pieces, I asked for the difference between the forms of attack. They're the same and you're making trivial little delineations. 'People believe photos more'. Oh yea? People treat terrorism more seriously than warmongers or 'black eyed demons'.

    Don't get me wrong, Obama and McCain are both whores. However, being a walking contradiction is something I have a problem with.
    SSG 37

  13. #11
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Fallingwater
    Posts
    5,081
    Thanks
    1,529
    Thanked 5,191 Times in 1,728 Posts
    I'll stand by the distinctions I drew. They're pretty clear. There's no reason to argue any further.

    Best
    kev
    At least Icarus tried!


    My Process: Dead Rider Graphic Novel (Dark Horse Comics) plus oil paintings, pencils and other goodies:
    http://www.conceptart.org/forums/sho...d.php?t=101106

    My "Smilechild" Music. Plus a medley of Commercial Music Cues and a Folksy Jingle!:
    http://www.myspace.com/kevferrara

  14. #12
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    521
    Thanks
    7
    Thanked 54 Times in 31 Posts
    Jill Greenberg Dropped by Photo Agency

    http://jeffreygoldberg.theatlantic.c...ed_by_phot.php

  15. #13
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    oakland
    Posts
    1,192
    Thanks
    279
    Thanked 199 Times in 122 Posts
    KEV!:


    mocking liars is funny for the young as well,
    perhaps just anyone disaffected.

    its not an empty gesture. humor can be very powerful even when "preaching to the converted".

    i think the likes of Shepard Fairey and ad-busters is noble and hilarious.

    and at the very least is not primarily a product of the "damaged ego of the aging but immature"
    if anything she is imitating the young guerilla movements tools.

    does anyone remember the deck of cards distributed when he war began?

    a parody came out of UC santa cruz, containing the "most wanted" as well as disturbing facts. ...i was proud to be a part of the team producing it and. you still see it selling well in california books stores or scattered university towns. it means something to some people...and its not empty bitter posturing., but the catharsis of humor.

  16. #14
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Meriden, CT
    Posts
    2,357
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked 6 Times in 3 Posts
    I agree with kev ferrara. The New Yorker cover was intended to be satire, lampooning some of the more extreme public views of Obama. The Atlantic cover was not intended in any way to be satirical. The Atlantic prides itself on in-depth articles that go beyond the topical headlines and sound bites of most TV and print journalism. The McCain article the cover was advertising is 10 full pages and examines why he has opinions regarding the Iraq and Vietnam Wars that run contrary to the popular view.

    The Atlantic intended the article and the cover to be useful to the voter who wishes to make an informed on Election Day. In my opinion, they offer a fairly balanced variety of intelligent discussion on many topics and as an institution I believe them to be relatively without bias (specific articles and authors can vary).

    With regard to what Jill Greenberg did with her photos: in general I don't care if someone uses photo-manip to grind a political axe, that's certainly within her free speech rights. In this situation she was acting as an agent of the Atlantic and abused the trust that both the magazine and McCain offered to her. I would also be surprised if her contract with the Atlantic allows her full ownership of the photos she took for them. Whether her photos amused or offended you, she acted unprofessionally. If she had done this with photos taken at a public event, I wouldn't care in the slightest.

    In these days of for-profit TV news I find it extremely difficult to find journalism that isn't either sensationalized, slanted, dumbed-down or abbreviated. The Atlantic (along with NPR, the BBC and a few others) is one of the exceptions and I think any future political candidate is going to remember this issue when they consider an interview request from them.
    bee-dubya-keo
    neo•keo sketchbook
    http://keo-art.blogspot.com/
    http://brendankeough.com/

    East meets West sketchbooks:
    Helzon - R.I.P. Redehlert Undertow Sartell BDFoster Anticonnor

    ________________________
    JoshK --part-time CT diner's sketchbook

  17. #15
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Fallingwater
    Posts
    5,081
    Thanks
    1,529
    Thanked 5,191 Times in 1,728 Posts
    I mostly agree with you bwkeough... except that Journalism has always been "for profit" which includes the profit of being able to spread a political ideology (or some opinion or other) which, if successfully spread, can result in Power for you and Loss of Power for your opponents. Which is why the non-profits tend to be a place where certain "disempowered" ideological types hope to gather in order to use the market power of the non profit to sway opinion against their enemies. The BBC and NPR have not been immune to this demographic tendency.

    It also should be noted that the Atlantic editors could quite easily have asked for less obnoxious photographs. The fact that they have wholly shifted the blame to the photographer is disingenuous, opportunistic and cowardly.
    At least Icarus tried!


    My Process: Dead Rider Graphic Novel (Dark Horse Comics) plus oil paintings, pencils and other goodies:
    http://www.conceptart.org/forums/sho...d.php?t=101106

    My "Smilechild" Music. Plus a medley of Commercial Music Cues and a Folksy Jingle!:
    http://www.myspace.com/kevferrara

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. figure drawing instructor dislikes hogarth
    By Jovian M in forum Art Discussions
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: September 23rd, 2009, 12:21 PM
  2. Just in case McCain somehow wins ...
    By S.C. Watson in forum Artist Lounge
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: November 5th, 2008, 02:06 PM
  3. McCain of Borg
    By scottmcd in forum Art Critique Center
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: October 13th, 2008, 04:26 PM
  4. Art: Sarah Palin & John McCain
    By fminus in forum Finished Art
    Replies: 43
    Last Post: October 11th, 2008, 03:19 AM
  5. Art: Obama v McCain caricature
    By jrr in forum Finished Art
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: March 4th, 2008, 06:58 PM

Members who have read this thread: 0

There are no members to list at the moment.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Developed Actively by the makers of the Best Amazon Podcast