[QUOTE=John Mace]
Don’t worry. They probably think things are bad for the wrong reasons. 
[/QUOTE]
Whew!
[QUOTE=Captain Amazing]
And they figure that people will buy more magazines if they have a cover story about Anne Liebowitz than about Afghanistan.
[/QUOTE]
Do they? Virtually every person in this country knew about the war in Afghanistan.
It’s hard to imagine that too many people who aren’t photography buffs would know who Anne Liebowitz is. Sure, most of them are familiar with her famous photographs, but they don’t know her name (I know I didn’t; I had to look her up on Wikipedia).
Indeed, the powerful photo of a grizzled Taliban with an RPG and his accompanying story got a 4/5 rating on MSNBC, while the Liebowitz photo and article rated a mere 2.5.
How does that sell magazines?
I can guarantee that worldwide, magazines which feature lesbians outsell magazines featuring geopolitical commentary on Afghanistan.
Enjoy,
Steven
Does she by any chance have a new book coming out? If she does, is that book by any chance published by a company that owns Newsweek? Just a thought…
New Book: Check
Publisher: Random House (owned by Bertelsmann, AG)
Ties to Newsweek: Doesn’t seem to be any
[QUOTE=Mtgman]
I can guarantee that worldwide, magazines which feature lesbians outsell magazines featuring geopolitical commentary on Afghanistan.
[/QUOTE]
Well, I love lesbians as much as the next guy (actually, probably more), but she isn’t exactly a 21-year old starlet.
Do you think that a cover piece featuring, say, Rosie O’Donell would sell a lot of copies?
[QUOTE=Mtgman]
I can guarantee that worldwide, magazines which feature lesbians outsell magazines featuring geopolitical commentary on Afghanistan.
[/QUOTE]
True, it seems though that Newsweek made the decision that in this case outside the US the Taliban fighter and the Afghan story on the cover would sell more.
I doubt you’d see a big difference in numbers of people who know recognise Liebowitz by name in the average US city and the average European city. They’d know her work, sure, but as has been said she doesn’t exactly have strong name recognition outside of photography/art people.
[QUOTE=yojimbo]
I doubt you’d see a big difference in numbers of people who know recognise Liebowitz by name in the average US city and the average European city. They’d know her work, sure, but as has been said she doesn’t exactly have strong name recognition outside of photography/art people.
[/QUOTE]
I don’t know about that. I’m not a photgraphy buff by any means, and I’ve head of her for years. She’s especially famous for the Yoko/Lennon cover picture on Rolling Stone years ago-- she was on that paper’s staff for quite some time. And then there was the Demi Moore in a pinted suit photo. I suspect she’s the most famous celebrity photogragher in this country.
BTW, it’s Liebovitz.
[QUOTE=John Mace]
BTW, it’s Liebovitz.
[/QUOTE]
Gaudere’s Law strikes again: it’s Leibovitz.
[QUOTE=John Mace]
Actually, it appears that most Americans do think things are going badly in Afghanistan. Link.
[/QUOTE]
Am I missing something? I don’t see that anywhere, although in the Gallup poll, the 49-46 margin in favor of ‘going very or moderately well’ is slimmer than I would have expected.
[QUOTE=RTFirefly]
Am I missing something? I don’t see that anywhere, although in the Gallup poll, the 49-46 margin in favor of ‘going very or moderately well’ is slimmer than I would have expected.
[/QUOTE]
My bad-- I added up the last three and didn’t see that the final category was “unsure” (5%). At any rate, the groups who think things are going well and the groups who think things are going badly are within the margin of error (+/- 3%). That poll is only a week or so old.
[QUOTE=RTFirefly]
Gaudere’s Law strikes again: it’s Leibovitz.
[/QUOTE]
That’s her fault! She should pronounce it with a long “i” in the first syllable.
[QUOTE=John Mace]
I don’t know about that. I’m not a photgraphy buff by any means, and I’ve head of her for years. She’s especially famous for the Yoko/Lennon cover picture on Rolling Stone years ago-- she was on that paper’s staff for quite some time. And then there was the Demi Moore in a pinted suit photo. I suspect she’s the most famous celebrity photogragher in this country.
[/QUOTE]
While those photographs are undeniably famous, I don’t think her name is.
For whatever reason, the names of talented photographers don’t seem to make it into the public consciousness.
For example, while this is undeniably one of the most famous photographs in the history of the world, I seriously doubt that more than a tiny fraction of Americans could tell you the photographer’s name.
[QUOTE=John Mace]
Actually, it appears that most Americans do think things are going badly in Afghanistan. Link.
[/QUOTE]
How can you say that with this
“Do you think U.S. efforts to establish a stable democratic government in Afghanistan have been mostly a success or mostly a failure?” N=755, MoE ± 4 (Form 2)
.
Mostly a
Success Mostly a
Failure Unsure
1/4-8/06 51 30 19
It seems to me that most Americans think it is a success.
[QUOTE=John Mace]
How do you know what is in the minds of most Americans? I’m not being snarky-- is there some polling data or some other info that you’re basing that statment on?
[/quote]
I will confess I was just making an assumption on the basis of no polls and two data points: (1) everyone knows we beat the Taliban’s asses back in 2001, and (2) it’s been almost completely overshadowed in the news ever since, thanks to Iraq, and (this summer anyway) Gaza and Lebanon.
There’s a 22,000 troop American force there, plus a NATO force of 20,000. So we’ve got more skin in the game than everyone else put together, other than the Afghans themselves.
Plus I assume we have a fair amount of political influence with Karzai’s government as a result of our 2001 intervention and continued military involvement, more so than any other foreign power.
I agree.
See above.
It’s also our rep that’s on the line. If Afghanistan falls apart, is Spain or Poland going to feel like they were to blame? No: we’ll be the ones asking ourselves why we didn’t put this war out of reach back in 2002, why we let Bush distract us with a second war in a second country before the future of Afghanistan was assured. This is our war: we got the rest of the world in there, and if we don’t finish what we started, it’s our bad, not theirs.
[QUOTE=John Mace]
My bad-- I added up the last three and didn’t see that the final category was “unsure” (5%). At any rate, the groups who think things are going well and the groups who think things are going badly are within the margin of error (+/- 3%). That poll is only a week or so old.
[/QUOTE]
Yeah, that’s a statistical tie, especially since the MOE on the difference between the ‘going well’ and ‘going badly’ stats is close to 6% (I’ll give the formula for the MOE of a difference in a moment, just for the hell of it). And the next most recent one is nearly two months old, so the Gallup’s the only poll worth looking at.
OK, MOE of a difference. (Run away! Run awaaaayyy!!!)
Let M1, M2 = MOE of estimates E1 and E2, respectively. (We’ll call them both M if they turn out to be the same.)
Let R = correlation coefficient between E1 and E2.
Then MOE(E1-E2) = sqrt[M1^2 + M2^2 -2RM1M2]
That’s more than you wanted to know already. It’s the standard-error-of-a-difference formula from the top of p.11 of this PDF, only with a constant multiple thrown in for good luck.
If M1=M2 (true here), and R=(-1) (it’s close here, since there are few unsures, so when the going-wells go up, the going-badlys go down by almost the exact same amount, and vice versa), then the formula simplifies to sqrt(4M^2) = 2M.
No charge for the stats lesson.
I dunno whether this is political bias or pro-trivia bias or just coincidence, but it seems it’s not just this week. (See here.) Can anyone figure out how to get a whole bunch of these? Say for the last few years? Could be interesting.
[QUOTE=neutron star]
While those photographs are undeniably famous, I don’t think her name is.
For whatever reason, the names of talented photographers don’t seem to make it into the public consciousness.
For example, while this is undeniably one of the most famous photographs in the history of the world, I seriously doubt that more than a tiny fraction of Americans could tell you the photographer’s name.
[/QUOTE]
Not really relavent.
- That picture is ~40 years old.
- A.L. produces photos that are part of pop culture, not highbrow journalistic work.
- Being able to name the person who took a particluar photo is not he same as recognizing someone’s name. Every American can tell you that Mozart was a famous composer of classical music, but few would recognize his work if they heard it.
As much as I agree that the corporate media is anything but liberal, I think the true story is Newsweek wants to sell magazines as others have said above. Gloom and doom cover stories may not appeal to the casual shopper going through the checkout, but lighter stories about personalities might. If you follow the news closely enough to subscribe, you don’t care what’s on the cover but if it’s on the rack next to other mags with Jennifer Aniston or Princess Diana it really has to compete with them by not putting hard news on the cover.