viz.

I ran across an interesting blog on Lens Culture that argues that a recent French magazine cover (posted below) equates Obama to a young, inexperienced boy.

Blogger Jim Casper writes:

This magazine is currently on the racks at news stands all over Paris, and the cover image has become one of those giant back-lit advertisements that blare from the outsides of kiosks on the streets, and ads at bus stops, and posters lining the hallways of the metro stations.

To me, it is the lowest form of pandering to prejudice. To me, it implies: "What do we get after Bush? Do you want an inexperienced cute young black kid running the US?" Of course, they never have to say this explicitily in words. Photographs and headlines can do volumes of damage all on their own. However, except for one tiny quote by Obama buried at the bottom of an inside page, the article presents policy sound bites by Clinton and McCain only, as if they are the only candidates worth listening to. Obama is dissed and dismissed with a visual racial slur.

I'm not sure that I would go so far as to call this a visual racial slur, though I do agree that the title dismisses Obama visually. While I don't have access to the article, from the blog's commentary the article itself is equally dismissive.