Problem is the cover image inflames the issue rather than providing a context for substantive discussion, which was their stated intention.
And thus it was a good thing the Editor was canned for prolonging this stupid episode.
‘Oh, yeah, trust me, there’ll be some outcry, but really, we’ll get more subscribers than we lose,’ I’m sure was said. But honestly, the only one who should be sacked here is not the editor, but the publisher that let this go to press. It won’t destroy the magazine, but it’ll hammer in one of the most cherished resources the magazine depends upon - the office subscriber who might just decide that they’ve gone too political for leaving in the lobby anymore.