Are The Onion's new "Editorial Cartoons" supposed to be editorial cartoons or satires of editorial cartoons?

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

http://www.theonion.com/content/files/images/Foley.article.jpg

― A-ron Hubbard (Hurting), Thursday, 19 October 2006 01:49 (twenty years ago)

http://www.theonion.com/content/files/images/KellySchoolShootings.jpg

― A-ron Hubbard (Hurting), Thursday, 19 October 2006 01:50 (twenty years ago)

http://www.theonion.com/content/files/images/KellyNewDawn.jpg

― A-ron Hubbard (Hurting), Thursday, 19 October 2006 01:50 (twenty years ago)

HAHAHAHAHAHAH

Oh, for the benefit of the doubt, the latter

"SICKO"!

― gwynywdd dwnyt fyrwr byychydd gww (donut), Thursday, 19 October 2006 01:51 (twenty years ago)

I mean THIS one certainly suggests satire knowing The Onion's audience, but it could easily be a real newspaper cartoon somewhere else. This one is also funnier, but it's still a pretty subtle kind of humor.

http://www.theonion.com/content/files/images/KellySpinach.article_1.jpg

― A-ron Hubbard (Hurting), Thursday, 19 October 2006 01:52 (twenty years ago)

It's all about the tufted hair dude on the lower right. That pretty much confirms this is a satire.

― gwynywdd dwnyt fyrwr byychydd gww (donut), Thursday, 19 October 2006 01:54 (twenty years ago)

The "New Dawn" one could be read as a genuine editorial cartoon with a sarcastic message OR as a satire of a conservative cartoon.

― A-ron Hubbard (Hurting), Thursday, 19 October 2006 01:55 (twenty years ago)

that stone temple songs that says "you really shouldn't have worn that dress" could be blaming bad male behavior on female clothing, or it could be a SATIRE of blaming bad male behavior on female clothing.

― gwynywdd dwnyt fyrwr byychydd gww (donut), Thursday, 19 October 2006 01:56 (twenty years ago)

I don't get the Mark Foley one at all, and the school shootings one is confusing - the "innocent kids" suggests a direct editorial criticism of the idea of arming teachers, but the rest of the cartoon looks like it's supposed to be supporting the idea.

― A-ron Hubbard (Hurting), Thursday, 19 October 2006 01:58 (twenty years ago)

The crying statue of liberty is hilarious though.

― A-ron Hubbard (Hurting), Thursday, 19 October 2006 01:59 (twenty years ago)

there this one joke where someone gets run over, which is really supposed to be tragic, yet we all laugh. blows my mind, man.

― gwynywdd dwnyt fyrwr byychydd gww (donut), Thursday, 19 October 2006 02:01 (twenty years ago)

No, that's not what I mean, but never mind. I know they're satire, I just think some of them are a bit unclear.

― A-ron Hubbard (Hurting), Thursday, 19 October 2006 02:01 (twenty years ago)

Sorry, a-ron, for that last one.. but my point is.. satire can be what we make of it. How do we know all those Jack Chick tracts aren't the greatest most straight-faced extended joke of them all? How can you prove they are? How can you prove they aren't?

― gwynywdd dwnyt fyrwr byychydd gww (donut), Thursday, 19 October 2006 02:02 (twenty years ago)

Oh, this is definitely satire. Check out the guns the schoolkids are carrying. Either that or the Onion have turned into NRA nutjobs.

― Billy Dods (Billy Dods), Thursday, 19 October 2006 02:03 (twenty years ago)

They're satire, I just think the guy sometimes confounds the satire a little. Like I don't get what the Foley one satirizes - do a lot of conservatives claim that we're actually all to blame for the Mark Foley scandal or something?

― A-ron Hubbard (Hurting), Thursday, 19 October 2006 02:05 (twenty years ago)

I know the gun one isn't SUPPORTING arming children and teachers, I guess I'm just getting at this fine distinction between a real editorial cartoon that sarcastically criticizes that idea and an editorial cartoon that actually satirizes cartoons IN FAVOR of that idea.

― A-ron Hubbard (Hurting), Thursday, 19 October 2006 02:06 (twenty years ago)

usually the onion is funny

― jhoshea megafauna (scoopsnoodle), Thursday, 19 October 2006 02:08 (twenty years ago)

the problem here is that you're assuming the Onion is doing this in favor of or against the issue. The Onion are making fun of political cartoons, because political cartoons are mostly horrid and sucky, lefty or righty ones, and overanalyzing the premise behind anything the Onion does besides trying to produce something that it supposed to make their readers laugh is getting beyond the point.

― gwynywdd dwnyt fyrwr byychydd gww (donut), Thursday, 19 October 2006 02:10 (twenty years ago)

I guess, but I just didn't really find them that funny at first. Except the Spinach one. He can't read the sign so he's got poop all over his hands!

― A-ron Hubbard (Hurting), Thursday, 19 October 2006 02:13 (twenty years ago)

the Onion failed you then. But thank you for posting them. Just the parody of the bad art aesthetic alone makes these worth it. The angry little patriot author on the lower right is the icing.

― gwynywdd dwnyt fyrwr byychydd gww (donut), Thursday, 19 October 2006 02:16 (twenty years ago)

"new dawn" reminds me (in a good way) of the "raping lady liberty" cartoons in our dumb century

but there are real cartoons that are even worse than these

― a.b. (alanbanana), Thursday, 19 October 2006 02:17 (twenty years ago)

*sigh*

post your favorite anti-liberal cartoons

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 19 October 2006 02:18 (twenty years ago)

http://www.coxandforkum.com/archives/06.02.05.RighttoBlaspheme-X.gif

― a.b. (alanbanana), Thursday, 19 October 2006 02:20 (twenty years ago)

because you need to know that the statue of liberty represents liberty

― a.b. (alanbanana), Thursday, 19 October 2006 02:21 (twenty years ago)

Sadly, the Onion have become victims of a media world that's often unintentionally funnier than them by now, especially since Bush took office (although it's not all Bush's fault, he's certainly helped.)

Oh grousegripe ya self before ya sigh yaself Ned. People wanting to post Onion cartoons don't immediately think "hmmm, i should check that long and awful 'post your favorite anti-liberal cartoons' thread". Sorry.

― gwynywdd dwnyt fyrwr byychydd gww (donut), Thursday, 19 October 2006 02:22 (twenty years ago)

HAHAHA, I just realized it says "All spinach factory workers"

― A-ron Hubbard (Hurting), Thursday, 19 October 2006 02:23 (twenty years ago)

Oh grousegripe ya self before ya sigh yaself Ned.

I wasn't saying, "You should have posted those on here," more a "Dude, you want examples of the real thing, we have tons!"

Though the posting of the Cox and Forkum example actually illustrates the fine distinction A-ron is asking for, I think -- there's a bitter, sadistic nastiness to C/F where the Onion examples are, somehow, lighter.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 19 October 2006 02:27 (twenty years ago)

(I'm totally going to cafepress "TEXT ME" underwear, regardless of the arguments)

― gwynywdd dwnyt fyrwr byychydd gww (donut), Thursday, 19 October 2006 02:27 (twenty years ago)

That wasn't really what I meant either, but I think what I'm talking about is such a fine line that it doesn't matter. Just to clarify on the gun one, I initially thought you could look at the viewpoint two ways

1) I, the cartoonist, am editorializing against the idea of arming teachers by showing how ridiculous it is

2) I, the cartoonist, am satirizing the kinds of editorial cartoons that would support arming teachers

Sigh. It doesn't really matter.

― A-ron Hubbard (Hurting), Thursday, 19 October 2006 02:30 (twenty years ago)

(xpost)

― A-ron Hubbard (Hurting), Thursday, 19 October 2006 02:30 (twenty years ago)

x-post -- Wacky new MySpace photo pose ahoy!

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 19 October 2006 02:30 (twenty years ago)

While the angle here is mostly parodying right wing political cartoons, there are really really bad lefty ones too..

l+g, Pullitzer Prize winning leftist hero of the arts, David Horsey:

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/dayart/20061013/Cartoon20061013.gif

― gwynywdd dwnyt fyrwr byychydd gww (donut), Thursday, 19 October 2006 02:33 (twenty years ago)

oh, i bet you that poster on the kid's wall is saying "Jesus"!

― gwynywdd dwnyt fyrwr byychydd gww (donut), Thursday, 19 October 2006 02:34 (twenty years ago)

Jess!

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 19 October 2006 02:39 (twenty years ago)

The first one seems to be deflecting criticism of Foley by suggesting that it's our over-sexualized society that's to blame for creating promiscuous youfs who tempt unsuspecting Senators, kinda like whoever it was that blamed Abu Ghraib on Britney Spears videos.

The school shootings one misses the point entirely by assuming it's some shady adult predator who's menacing schoolkids and not the kids themselves popping caps in each others' butts. So arming teachers against the kids isn't what the cartoonist is even arguing, I assume. You were thrown by your ability to interject reality into a situation, apparently.

― slugbuggy (slugbuggy), Thursday, 19 October 2006 02:45 (twenty years ago)

#1 is based on an online article by Matt Drudge, #2 is based on a series of newspaper op-eds by John Lott

― a.b. (alanbanana), Thursday, 19 October 2006 02:51 (twenty years ago)

I think the school kids are labeled "innocent kids" because they are vulnerable to attacks by "sicko," not because their innocence is being corrupted by the teaching material. So I don't think the satire is confounded.

― Curt1s St3ph3ns, Thursday, 19 October 2006 03:25 (twenty years ago)

The best thing about the bagged spinach one is the two tubs labeled "SPINACH" and "BAGS."

― Curt1s St3ph3ns, Thursday, 19 October 2006 03:27 (twenty years ago)

the toles-ishness it aims for makes the art look in worse than it already is in comparison

plus it makes you expect something slightly lefty rather than weepy and patriotic

― Euai Kapaui (tracerhand), Thursday, 19 October 2006 03:41 (twenty years ago)

oh, i bet you that poster on the kid's wall is saying "Jesus"!

-- gwynywdd dwnyt fyrwr byychydd gww (do...), October 19th, 2006.

Jess!

-- Ned Raggett (ne...), October 19th, 2006.

the kids love Strongo!

― latebloomer (latebloomer), Thursday, 19 October 2006 03:51 (twenty years ago)

I like that Horsey cartoon.

― jaymc (jaymc), Thursday, 19 October 2006 03:56 (twenty years ago)

I like that Horsey cartoon.

"I'm comin', Elizabeth, I'm comin'!"

― gwynywdd dwnyt fyrwr byychydd gww (donut), Thursday, 19 October 2006 04:16 (twenty years ago)

Yeah, I like the horsey cartoon, too. What's so awful about it? Kinda funny, as much as a polical cartoon ever is.

I don't get the Mark Foley one at all

A-ron is confusing me on this thread. The Mark Foley one is probably the most obvious. The guy is labelled "INNOCENT SENATOR" and is being unfairly tempted by all these irresistable homosexual acts and taught young bodies. And the guy in the corner is understanding the "INNOCENT SENATOR's" humanity. And of course the Statue of Liberty is crying.

OR IS A-RON BEING SO SATIRICAL THAT WE JUST CAN'T UNDERSTAND IT???!!!

― this, however, is the crucial moment from the libertine's point of view (kenan), Thursday, 19 October 2006 04:32 (twenty years ago)

i wuvved the repeating statue of liberty cartoons in the onion's "dumb 20th c" book

― Britain's Obtusest Shepherd (Alan), Thursday, 19 October 2006 06:46 (twenty years ago)

How fucking dumb do you have to be to think these are "real" editorial cartoons?

― n/a (Nick A.), Thursday, 19 October 2006 09:14 (twenty years ago)

In a world where things like this:

Daily Star pulls "Daily Fatwa" page

are done quite seriously, I don't think it's necessarily "dumb" to be confused about the blurred boudaries between satire and statement.

― Blah Blah Blah (kate), Thursday, 19 October 2006 09:56 (twenty years ago)

OTM, kate. also if you don't find the cartoons funny on either level (or find them dumb) it's hard to distinguish.

― jed_ (jed), Thursday, 19 October 2006 10:10 (twenty years ago)

Also, these things require quite a familiarity with the organs in question, and their political affiliation to be able to distinguish whether something is satire or not.

As I said in that other thread, had the Star's satire appeared in one of those Onion cartoons, it would be considered hillarious. But because it was in the Star, it was considered dangerous.

It takes a foreknowledge of the aims and affiliation of varying media outlets to understand the intended or actual meaning. (The Onion = left, the Star = right). And even with that knowledge, both examples of satire gave me considerable pause.

― Blah Blah Blah (kate), Thursday, 19 October 2006 10:14 (twenty years ago)

As I said in that other thread, had the Star's satire appeared in one of those Onion cartoons, it would be considered hillarious. But because it was in the Star, it was considered dangerous.

but if the star's page had appeared in The Onion it would have been as a satire of how the tabloid press demonises muslims, so the target of the satire would be very different. its not so simple a comparison...

― i am not a nugget (stevie), Thursday, 19 October 2006 10:25 (twenty years ago)

The words and the images could have been exactly the same - the only clue as to how to read it would come from the context.

To those of us who are not so media clued up as yourself, these things are, indeed, quite confusing.

― Blah Blah Blah (kate), Thursday, 19 October 2006 10:30 (twenty years ago)

i'm sure Hurting was being partially disingenuous for the sake of the question. but it's the unfunnyness that makes it confusing, for me at least.

― jed_ (jed), Thursday, 19 October 2006 10:37 (twenty years ago)

The words and the images could have been exactly the same - the only clue as to how to read it would come from the context.

To those of us who are not so media clued up as yourself, these things are, indeed, quite confusing.

i don't think the same piece would have run on the onion, to be honest, so i guess the point's moot. but it's still an important distinction.

― i am not a nugget (stevie), Thursday, 19 October 2006 10:56 (twenty years ago)

Wonkette's weekly analysis of political cartoons always makes me giggle.

― Hello Sunshine (Hello Sunshine), Thursday, 19 October 2006 11:39 (twenty years ago)

Ah, ok. I guess that idea just seemed too far out to even occur to me as a target for satire.

― A-ron Hubbard (Hurting), Thursday, 19 October 2006 13:31 (twenty years ago)

kate: I never said anyone was dumb. Only that I didn't get the cornfusion.

― this, however, is the crucial moment from the libertine's point of view (kenan), Thursday, 19 October 2006 13:36 (twenty years ago)

those are really funny!

― gear (gear), Thursday, 19 October 2006 16:17 (twenty years ago)

Umm pointing out that the cartoon's school-shooting adult doesn't match reality is the equivalent of pointing out that Jackie Harvey keeps getting celebrities' names wrong.

― nabisco (nabisco), Thursday, 19 October 2006 16:48 (twenty years ago)

I see some Mad Magazine in the art sytle. Not exactly Dave Berg, but maybe some of his contemporaries.

― kingfish prætor (kingfish 2.0), Thursday, 19 October 2006 16:52 (twenty years ago)

Which is to say, I guess, that this is a pretty well-established Onion comedy routine: this cartoonist creates political cartoons on about the same level that Jackie Harvey writes entertainment news or Jean Teasdale or Jim Anchower write a newspaper column. It's pretty amazing to me, actually, that whoever's doing these doesn't just caricature some political opinion, but strikes the exact same tone of smug faulty logic and regular-guy posturing and weird piousness that's in any bad political cartoon; it's really well done.

― nabisco (nabisco), Thursday, 19 October 2006 16:53 (twenty years ago)

yeah i love these

― and what (ooo), Thursday, 19 October 2006 16:54 (twenty years ago)

HAVE A SPINACH TACO, AMIGO

― and what (ooo), Thursday, 19 October 2006 16:55 (twenty years ago)

I see some Mad Magazine in the art sytle. Not exactly Dave Berg, but maybe some of his contemporaries.

Whoa, I was about to say the exact same thing. More like Al Jaffee, I think.

― jaymc (jaymc), Thursday, 19 October 2006 16:56 (twenty years ago)

(Or do I mean Sergio Aragones? I forget.)

― jaymc (jaymc), Thursday, 19 October 2006 16:58 (twenty years ago)

That little guy is hilarious!

― the Adversary (but, still, a friend of yours) (Uri Frendimein), Thursday, 19 October 2006 17:03 (twenty years ago)

its elementary!

― and what (ooo), Thursday, 19 October 2006 17:08 (twenty years ago)

Yeah these are great.

― deej.. (deej..), Thursday, 19 October 2006 17:12 (twenty years ago)

Welcome back, America!

― deej.. (deej..), Thursday, 19 October 2006 17:13 (twenty years ago)

he's got the heavy-lidded look down pat on the truth-tellers

― gear (gear), Thursday, 19 October 2006 17:15 (twenty years ago)

How often do "real" political cartoonists add a little self-portrait like that?

― researching ur life (grady), Thursday, 19 October 2006 18:31 (twenty years ago)

i always assumed it was something of a throwback. Much like the overkill on punchlines and symbols is simultaneously a throwback and a "see what i did there?"-style punchline of its own.

― deej.. (deej..), Thursday, 19 October 2006 18:33 (twenty years ago)

It really underlines the satire when he 'overdoes' the representations.

― deej.. (deej..), Thursday, 19 October 2006 18:34 (twenty years ago)

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/opinion/ssi/images/Toles/c_10192006_520.gif

There was also a Saudi cartoonist who did that, but I think he's retired now.

― Pleasant Plains /// (Pleasant Plains ///), Thursday, 19 October 2006 18:34 (twenty years ago)

I think Oliphant started the modern trend but he didn't caricature himself so specifically (ie, at desk with ink, etc.). First time I ever recognized it was a local cartoonist in upstate New York in the early eighties, which is also around the time I saw Toles's work.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 19 October 2006 18:35 (twenty years ago)

So how long before one of these Onion cartoons is republished in a "real" newspaper by a gullible editor?

― Pleasant Plains /// (Pleasant Plains ///), Thursday, 19 October 2006 18:38 (twenty years ago)

I dare you to post the school shootings on Free Republic.

― Hello Sunshine (Hello Sunshine), Thursday, 19 October 2006 19:13 (twenty years ago)

done

― gear (gear), Thursday, 19 October 2006 19:23 (twenty years ago)

:-D

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 19 October 2006 19:23 (twenty years ago)

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1722463/posts

― gear (gear), Thursday, 19 October 2006 19:24 (twenty years ago)

This thread has been pulled.

Pulled on 10/19/2006 1:47:56 PM PDT by Admin Moderator, reason:

The Onion has requested that none of their material be posted at FR.

― gear (gear), Thursday, 19 October 2006 19:52 (twenty years ago)

"we are all mark foley" is awesome.

― s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 19 October 2006 20:28 (twenty years ago)

there are really really bad lefty ones too..

I'm getting really sick of This Modern World:

http://www.workingforchange.com/webgraphics/WFC/TMW10-18-06.jpg

OMG CONSERVATIVES NOT GETTING IT SHOCKA/ROFFLES.

― researching ur life (grady), Thursday, 19 October 2006 23:12 (twenty years ago)

although, lol @ bespectacled beardo lib. and bald conserv.

― researching ur life (grady), Thursday, 19 October 2006 23:14 (twenty years ago)

btw the mad artist yall are thinking of is don martin

― and what (ooo), Friday, 20 October 2006 00:12 (twenty years ago)

http://images.villagevoice.com/issues/0642/sutton-big.jpg

― nate p. (natepatrin), Friday, 20 October 2006 00:16 (twenty years ago)

Sutton also wins the prize for most insane GWB caricature in editorial cartoons today:

ihttp://www.villagevoice.com/news/0637,sutton,74428,9.html

― nate p. (natepatrin), Friday, 20 October 2006 00:17 (twenty years ago)

OMG, this is the best one so far:

ihttp://www.theonion.com/content/node/54367

― A-ron Hubbard (Hurting), Thursday, 26 October 2006 04:50 (twenty years ago)

for me to poop on... I liked the spinach one the best so far.

― Portable Dorkness (Dick Butkus), Thursday, 26 October 2006 04:52 (twenty years ago)

I like this running "innocent ---" thing he has going.

― A-ron Hubbard (Hurting), Thursday, 26 October 2006 04:59 (twenty years ago)

I like this running to the bathroom thing I got when I'm going.

― Portable Dorkness (Dick Butkus), Thursday, 26 October 2006 05:01 (twenty years ago)

this week's mars rover article is one of their all-time classics IMO...

― You've Got Scourage On Your Breath (Haberdager), Thursday, 26 October 2006 07:26 (twenty years ago)

I was rather fond of this recent column:

http://www.theonion.com/content/node/53929

― A-ron Hubbard (Hurting), Thursday, 26 October 2006 11:59 (twenty years ago)

Sutton also wins the prize for most insane GWB caricature in editorial cartoons today:

I would argue with that by presenting Martin Rowson:

http://image.guardian.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/martin_rowson/2006/09/11/rowson1.jpg
http://image.guardian.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/martin_rowson/2006/10/20/rowson512.jpg

― Pleasant Plains /// (Pleasant Plains ///), Thursday, 26 October 2006 16:31 (twenty years ago)

Rowson's just biting Steve Bell, isn't he?

― Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Thursday, 26 October 2006 16:44 (twenty years ago)

http://www.theconnection.org/photogallery/PoliticalCartoons/bell/images/1.jpg

Six of one, half a dozen of the other, but yes.

― Pleasant Plains /// (Pleasant Plains ///), Thursday, 26 October 2006 16:47 (twenty years ago)

http://goaste.cx/goaste/pictures/satirespecial/special%202/stevebell.gif

― Sadly, he will be the next Alexis Petridish. (Dom Passantino), Thursday, 26 October 2006 16:48 (twenty years ago)

two weeks pass...

http://www.theonion.com/content/files/images/Cartoon-Michael-J-Fox.jpg

― deej.. (deej..), Friday, 10 November 2006 18:59 (nineteen years ago)

"We Are All Mark Foley" may be my favorite phrase in a long while.

― Zwan (miccio), Friday, 10 November 2006 19:16 (nineteen years ago)

Seconded.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Friday, 10 November 2006 19:16 (nineteen years ago)

The Tom Toles cartoonist in the corner is the sensational character find of 2006

― Adrienne Begley (sparklecock), Friday, 10 November 2006 23:09 (nineteen years ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.