Posts Tagged ‘Esquire’

POLITIK | Vilka är de största skillnaderna mellan de politiska partierna i USA? Tretusen tillfrågades i en opinionsundersökning i USA.


I undersökningen, utförd av NBC News och Esquire, fick de tillfrågade bland annat en fråga om vad som gjorde dem argast.

Vissa skillnader, men också tydliga likheter, framkom mellan republikaner och demokrater.

What Republicans get angriest about:

Congress being dysfunctional (80%); massive consumer fraud (80%); cops shooting an unarmed black man (65%).

What Democrats get angriest about:

Cops shooting an unarmed black man (84%); massive consumer fraud (83%); billionaire vowing to spend $500 million on 2016 elections (80%).

När det ordet ”anger” definierade man det på följande sätt:

Anger—the intensity and frequency with which it is felt—can be a challenge to measure, but for these purposes we kept it simple: We measured and compared anger primarily according to the frequency with which respondents report hearing or reading something that makes them angry. Those who report feeling angry a few times a day are considered angrier than those who report feeling angry once a day, who are angrier than those who get angry once a week, and so forth. To the lucky souls who say they rarely hear or read something that makes them angry, namaste: We’d love to know your secret.

Läs mer: Hela opinionsundersökningen kan läsas på Esquire.

Bild: Popsugar.

Read Full Post »

VAL 2016 | Enligt Mark Salter, veteran från två presidentvalskampanjer, är Donald Trump den förste kandidat som han velat ”punsch in the face”.

Esquire US February 2016

I samma nummer som Esquire publicerade sin stora intervju med Trump öppnade tidskriften med denna attack från Salter som också varit John McCains politiska rådgivare under många år.

I’ve always distrusted people who never question their assumptions or test their opinions against their critics’ arguments. I believe empathy is the starting point of wisdom, and imagining things from an opponent’s point of view is essential to solving problems in a closely divided polity.

Yet on the subject of Donald Trump, my mind is closed. Slammed shut. Triple-bolted. Sealed like a tomb.


There have been lots of candidates in the past I’ve disagreed with, even loathed. There’s only one I’ve wanted to punch in the face as he’s doing one of his pursed-lips, chin-tilting Il Duce impersonations.


He promises to make America great again and rejects the ideals and decency that made us great in the first place. Trump isn’t a fascist. He just says stupid, offensive things, seems unaware we have a Bill of Rights, and surrounds himself with aides who appear to have graduated first in their class at the Baghdad Bob School of Awesome Ass Kissing. Fascism is an ideology. Self-aggrandizement isn’t.

Självupphöjelse är kanske ingen traditionell strategi för att vinna väljarnas sympatier men det har knappast skadat Trump så här långt.

Att det blir ett mindre användbart kampanjverktyg i en valkampanj mot Hillary Clinton är däremot mer troligt. Då måste Trump nämligen också försöka vinna missnöjda demokrater och independents.

Läs mer: Scott Raabs intervju med Donald Trump i Esquire.

Tidskriftsomslag: Esquire (US), februari 2016.

Read Full Post »

GODA RÅD | Vad skall man göra om man plötsligt vaknar upp en dag och inser att man är liberal? Varför inte fråga A. A. Gill?

I livsstilsmagasinet Esquire (engelska utgåvan) har den kontroversiella skribenten och kritikern Gill en egen krönika.

Under vinjetten ”Uncle Dysfunctional” svarar han på mer eller mindre seriösa frågor från läsarna.


I think I’m a liberal. I’ve always been attracted to proportional representation and closer ties to Europe, but I can’t talk to anyone about it.

My parents are missionary position Labour. My dad says liberals should be shot and my mum thinks they’re just Tories who don’t like being spanked. I know my friends would laugh at me. And what girl’s going to go out with a liberal? So I pretend to be an anarchist. But I feel like a fraud. My heart’s with a caring, devolved society and a fiscally responsible mixed economy, with checks and balances and no nuclear deterrent. What shall I do? I’m marginally desperate. Sam, by email

Sam, there are those who think liberalism is a mental disorder and can be cured. They might suggest you try fox hunting, running a hedge fund and listening to thrash metal.

You could go into treatment, do aversion therapy by spending six weeks in Finland, but personally I don’t hold with that. I think you’re born liberal and I don’t see any reason why you shouldn’t marry or adopt children.

You don’t have to tell everyone straight away, you can have proportional coming out. You might start just by trying to tell the truth and not saying what you think other people want to hear. And stop smiling in that insincere way and do something about your sweaty hands. For more advice, get in touch with my helpline: twofacedscab@torybumboy.yuk

Read Full Post »

DESIGN | Den 31 december 2012 blir sista pappersnumret av Newsweek. News-Week, som man då skrev namnet, kom ut första gången i februari 1933.

Därefter går man över till betaltjänst på olika plattformar. The Daily Beast är tänkt att förbli tillgänglig som den är idag.

Huvudanledningen till nedläggningen är ekonomiska. Tidskriften säljer helt enkelt inte tillräckligt. Vikande reklam- och försäljningssiffror har länge pekat mot en nedläggning.

Förklaringen till varför Tina Brown inte har lyckats lyfta Newsweek är många.

Men en av kritiken (av många) som riktats mot henne är att hon försökt kompensera vikande relevans med hjälp spekulativa omslag och attacker på offentliga personer.

Noreen Malone, The National Review, skriver:

Despite her enthusiasm for her web-only project, The Daily Beast, Brown hasn’t been able to keep up with the very media landscape she helped to create. We’re living in the high era of buzz […] (Now you build this person up! Now you tear her down!), and, arguably, the low-level chatter about stories has overtaken the stories themselves. To get their attention, Brown’s been forced to resort to what all those chatterers have labeled trolling (though, to her credit, often of a particularly imaginative bent): the Michelle Bachmann eyes, the gay Obama cover, the ghost of Princess Di, the Heaven Is Real argument. If they look like moves of desperation that’s because, well, they are. Former employees say that Brown had, quite clearly, lost her confidence. Many of her editorial decisions look more like catchup than agenda-setting: her recent efforts to amp up coverage of philanthropy, politics, and feminism seem driven more by her rivalry with Arianna Huffington than by any particular moral or intellectual imperatives. According to a former employee and Brown fan, “Tina didn’t have good concepts by the end, so she just started attacking public figures.”

En av de mer harmlösa ”lånen” är exemplet ovan (artikel av Sidney Blumenthal). Omslaget skall illustrera att Abraham Lincoln minsann inte skyggade för dirty tricks om det gällde att vinna valkampanjen för att sedan kunna avskaffa slaveriet.

Det är inte svårt att se att man har kopierat majnumret av Esquire 1968 – ett av de mest kända omslagen som finns.

George Lois tillhör en av giganterna inom reklamvärlden. Han var en av de riktiga Mad Men långt innan tv-serien var påtänkt.

Så här skriver Lois själv om omslaget:

This is my Esquire cover of spring 1968, before Tricky Dick was nominated for president. My composite shot was a satirical comment on the 1960 TV debates, when the Whittier Wiz lost to the handsome John F. Kennedy by a five o’clock shadow because he looked evil on America’s screens. I located this profile shot (Nixon getting shut eye on a plane) and we photographed the hands of four makeup artists, including the guy wielding the lipstick. The day it hit the newsstands, editor Harold Hayes got a phone call from some stiff on Nixon’s staff. He was miffed. In fact, he was incensed. You know why? The lipstick. He said it was an attack on his boss’s masculinity. He screamed, ”Showing Richard Nixon as a flaming queen is outrageous. If he becomes president, Esquire had better watch out!,” and hung up.

Övrigt: Citatet av Lois från $ellebrity – My Angling and Tangling with Famous People (Phaidon Press Ltd). Tidskriftsomslaget ovan är Newsweek den 22 oktober 2012. Fler uppmärksammade och provocerande omslag.

Read Full Post »

KONFLIKT | I en intervju i Esquire ger f.d. presidenten Bill Clinton sin syn på Barack Obama, Mitt Romney och de republikanska presidentkandidaterna.

Charles P. Pierce och Mark Warren intervjuade Clinton. Först Clinton om varför det politiska klimatet har blivit alltmer konfrontativt.

One of the real dilemmas we have in our country and around the world is that what works in politics is organization and conflict. That is, drawing the sharp distinctions. But in real life, what works is networks and cooperation. And we need victories in real life, so we’ve got to get back to networks and cooperation, not just conflict. But politics has always been about conflict, and in the coverage of politics, information dissemination tends to be organized around conflict as well. It is extremely personal now, and you see in these primaries that the more people agree with each other on the issues, the more desperate they are to make the clear distinctions necessary to win, so the deeper the knife goes in.


ESQUIRE: What forces created such a narrow field of Republican contenders for the presidency in this election cycle?

CLINTON: Well, there are all kinds of reasons why someone like Mitch Daniels or Haley Barbour or Chris Christie wind up not being candidates. I think governors in general — maybe not some of the new Republican crop that got in trouble quickly, but that generally, the conservative Republican governors tend to be more oriented toward trying to work with Democrats and getting things done. But it’s been building up since the mid-seventies — this rage against the government — and frankly, on at least two occasions they were richly rewarded for the just-say-no thing. They won the Congress in 1994 and 2010 by just being against everything and saying the sky was gonna fall. And since the people didn’t feel better by the time of the election, it worked. One of the reasons people stay with a strategy like that is it works. And then when it seems not to be working, they tend to change.

Of course, public opinion has a lot to do with this. That means people should really take care when they vote, and pay more attention to what people say they’re going to do — instead of just how they feel about how things are going.

With someone like Newt Gingrich, it’s a different kettle of fish. Because as a private citizen he was for certain important health-care reforms and believed in climate change and believed there had to be a strong reaction to it. And now he’s just like Romney. Neither one of them can say what they believe to be true and get nominated. Romney’s still trying to figure out what he did as governor of Massachusetts and still appeal to this driving vituperative energy.

Övrigt: På hemsidan finns en redigerad version av en intervju som gjordes med expresident Clinton den 30 november och 16 december 2011. Hela intervjun var införd i februarinumret (2012) av Esquire. På hemsidan kan man också se gamla tidskriftsomslag från 1933-2011.

Read Full Post »

DESEIGN: Presidentvalet 1980 blev en jordskredsseger för Ronald Reagan. Det var också början på republikanernas långa maktinnehav. Omslaget är daterat augusti 1980. Esquire varnar för Reagan, men troligen lockade bilden fler köpare än själva varningen.

Read Full Post »

KRISBRANSCH: Alla sneglar oroligt på The New York Times. Om värdens bästa nyhetstidning har problem – (och NYT har gigantiska problem) – kan ingen kvalitetstidning känna sig riktigt säker.

Vad är då problemet? Tom Junod – som bloggar på The Politics Blog på Esquire – sätter fingret på åtminstone ett av problemen när han skriver;

The New York Times has a strange and uncertain relationship to the Internet. Not only has it responded to the destruction of its business model by investing heavily in an online business model as mystifying in its particulars as the health care bill; it also has responded to the destruction of its authority by ceding its authority at every turn. While the editors at the Times aren’t dumb enough to think that everything that appears online must be true, they are apparently dumb enough to think that everything that appears online must be genuine, as a reflection of what people are really thinking — or, more importantly, feeling — about a given subject. (…) The opinions of bloggers are adduced regularly in news analyses and op-ed columns, as if a chorus of three or four represents a groundswell; the psychopath lurking on the ”comments” page has replaced the mythical ”man on the street” as the leading indicator of national consensus. There’s nothing sadder than seeing the greatest newspaper in the history of the planet reduced to a strategy of counting Google hits (…)

Detta skulle kunna vara en beskrivning av inte bara svenska morgontidningar utan också av radio och tv inom svensk public service.

Att ständigt blicka ängsligt mot Internet – och de mer eller mindre omfattande ”opinioner” som kan bildas på nätet – kan knappast vara uppbyggligt eller ens hälsosamt för kvalitetsmedier som vill vara mer än bara allmänt tyckande.

Inte konstigt att prenumeranter lämnar när morgontidningarna inte ens vågar tror på sig själva och sitt uppdrag.

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »