Whip It Good

There's an incredible lack of understanding about cartoons and illustrations in the media. No one seems to know the difference between illustrations and cartoons, what's drawn and what's photshopped, what's traced, what's swiped, what's satire and what's not. I think the infamous New Yorker fist bump cover by Barry Blitt was a good example of the first and last of those points. Now Blitt's under criticism again for his work.

O'Reilly calls a Blitt illustration accompanying Frank Rich's Sunday column a "cartoon" and an "atrocity" for depicting the Statue Of Liberty holding a whip. (Didn't people draw things like that years ago?) O'Reilly doesn't think torture is an outrage, just an illustration defiling a statue. Putting that incredible cognitive dissonance aside, O'Reilly doesn't seem to understand the basic concept of cartooning, illustration or even opinion for that matter. Blitt was only doing his job in illustrating Rich's concepts presented in the column. It wasn't a cartoon. It was also on the Op-Ed page where I thought opinion was warranted.

Another thing: Cartoonists--or illustrators in this case--are never mentioned by name. O'Reilly wouldn't cite an offending column in the Times without noting its author. Why no credit to Barry Blitt?

I give O'Reilly 5 loofas (out of 5) for this Pinheaded segment.

(via Comics Reporter)