Time Magazine Goes Rogue With No Palin Cover

by Glynnis MacNicol | 9:45 am, November 19th, 2009

» 6 comments

T113009 It looks like Time is the first to opt off the Sarah Palin media gravy train, which may or may not mean the rest of us also get to stop talking about her in the near future.

It’s an interesting decision for the magazine to make — it’s not like they tend to shy away from topical or controversial covers, and Palin is a surefire conversation (newsstand) starter.

However, perhaps they felt they were so thoroughly trumped in the topical, controversial, week-long headline generating department by Newsweek’s cover that they opted out of the game altogether (literally: none of the feature articles address Palin). That said, this cover is sure to be a big conversation piece with the Park Slope crowd.

Update: Office Hours favorite James Poniewozik has a media column about Palin that just went live: Survivor: Alaska.

Going Rogue, How Many More Sarah Palin Posts Can The Media Take, Nadil Hassan, Newsweek, Sarah Palin, The State of Journalism, Time

felixw

Time magazine would have put a photo of Obama on the cover, but after 239 cover stories on Obama they have run out of photos of him. I guess they could get creative, and pull out an old photo of him in running shorts, but that would be a desperate act, huh?
Puter Boi

Seriously, Glynnis…you need to get out more. This Palin fixation is bordering on the bizarre.
rmbltmbl

http://www.dailyfinance.com/2009/11/18/palin-photographer-breached-contract-with-sale-to-newsweek/

Probably a good thing they didn’t then.
balpert1

The news stand sales figures should be interesting.
TinaFromTampa

In a way, this cover does relate to the former Mayor of Wasilla.
It’s obvious she wasn’t paying close attention to what her daughter Bristol was doing.

-Tina From Tampa
“Saying dumb things first, so you don’t have to.”
ImNotBlue

NotSoAnonymous says:
November 19, 2009 at 8:19 pm

Interesting. I wonder if this opinion of yours that someone how her parental role is important, was the same view you took when Bill Clinton wasn’t watching his daughter… you know, because he was harrassing workers and diddling interns. Oh, what am I saying… Clinton was a Democrat… it doesn’t matter what he did… I forgot the double standard. My mistake.

BTW… how’s the stalking going? Making a difference yet?