Posted on 04/19/2008 12:29:59 PM PDT by Rufus2007
Despite outcry from veterans and supporters of the military over the cover of Time’s April 21 issue, a spokesman for the magazine insists editors did nothing wrong.
The Business & Media Institute (BMI) posted a story on April 17 about Iwo Jima veterans outraged by Time’s decision to alter the iconic image of Marines raising an American flag at Iwo Jima and replace the flag with a tree. The altered image was used to illustrate a new war on global warming.
“TIME has the utmost respect for our nation's veterans and we well understand the power of the iconic image of the raising of the flag over Iwo Jima,” Daniel Kile, associate director of public relations at Time, said in an e-mail to BMI. “We believe this is a respectful use of this symbol of American valor and courage and serves to highlight another great challenge facing our nation.”
(Excerpt) Read more at businessandmedia.org ...
|
Being Big Media means never having to say you’re sorry.
I’ve been on vacation all week. Does anyone have a link to the actual image?
There’s no breaking through the self-important bubble called liberalism that these people have covered themselves in since they realized that shaking a rattle can get attention. It’s just too bad they don’t have enough ability/originality to come up with an icon of their own, but have to use one so recognizable that it will assure them of a free ride of attention without any effort.
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/current
It’s pretty disgusting to watch the Goracle’s Band of Bikeriding Global Warmers exploit WWII to pimp their “carbon credit” trading business. Some people will do anything to become rich. Even exploit our fallen veterans.
Time lost its ways 30 year ago.
If insulting veterans is the only way that they can think of to gain attention for their “product”, it’s time work on contacting the remaining advertisers in the rag.
Time magazine is dying. Newsweek is dying. They think the only way they can survive is by being “relevant”, and the way they think they can be “relevant” is by being offensive.
If they thought advocating murder would get people to buy their rags, they would advocate murder. They are willing to be racist, pornographic, grotesque, utterly filthy. Because they think that by doing so they will be “relevant”.
The best response to their gutter behavior is to not buy their magazines. And no matter how offended they make you, and how you rise to the defense of those they have maligned, always be sure to ask others to stop buying their magazine, because it just encourages them.
Importantly, one of their biggest subscribers are public schools. So if you have the opportunity to ask your school system to no longer subscribe to Time and Newsweek, do so.
This is a flap over nothing. The outraged veterans should lie down for a bit and get over it. The magazine did not insult them in any way; it used a well-known symbol of victory for a foolish cause. Nothing more.
Really? Just exactly which war were you in that you can criticize them?
That particular image represents some of the purest heroism that exists in human history - it represents a lot more than an "iconic image" that can be exploited at will.
You really never did risk everything you had for your country, did you?
TIME has the utmost respect for our nation’s veterans....My ass!
TIME magazine has desecrated on of our nations most revered photos taken on just one of the many battlefields were many Americans died. It shows total disrespect for all service personnel. How can the concocted phony global warming scam be compared to Iwo Jima? What a discrace to our nations history!
“TIME has the utmost respect for our nation’s veterans and we well understand the power of the iconic image of the raising of the flag over Iwo Jima,” Daniel Kile, associate director of public relations at Time, said”
Notice he didn’t say he had, but Time.
A corporate entity.
Kile is talking through the side of his neck.
Palmdale speedway
I do not blame Time magazine. It is a moonbat magazine written by moonbats for moonbats. As it subscriber base reflects, it thumbed its nose at common sense decent and patriotic folk a long time ago. It is kept afloat by moonbats and that is a business model which is doomed to fail.
“And when did you serve in the military? Which war were you in?”
The government did not mind trading on the heroism of the Marines who subdued the Japanese defenders of Iwo Jima:
http://www.iwojima.com/bond/index.htm
so perhaps TIME, purveyor of “The American Century”, had no compunction about following suit when it was looking for a national icon to turn to yet another crusade demanding “sacrifice of some for the sake of all” from the imperial state’s subjects.
The main consequence of the battle was not so much its effect on the outcome of the war in which it was fought, but in the political and publicity dynamics through which it enabled the Marine Corps to persevere into the Cold War as a distinct force:
http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G1-167254012.html
http://sonic.net/~bstone/archives/060618.shtml
http://www.amazon.com/review/R2Q6TOREYAPPM7
http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/battle_of_iwo_jima.htm
http://ww2db.com/battle_spec.php?battle_id=12
http://muse.jhu.edu/login?uri=/journals/journal_of_military_history/v071/71.4estes.html
http://warhistorian.org/grimsley-iwo-jima-what-if.pdf
The notion that only those who have fought in our wars have any place in the discussions surrounding them and the iconic imagery generated from their outcomes may be plausible in an imperial state. It is not worthy of any respect whatsoever in a constitutional republic.
You need professional help...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
