Digg

The Digg Crew wants to hear your thoughts!
Please take our short survey about Digg and potential feature ideas.

10 magazine covers that shook the world

latimes.com — Barack and Michelle, John and Yoko, and other infamous magazine cover photos.

Bury

miranda622 141 days ago, made popular 141 days ago

1080 diggs
digg it

115 Comments
Who Dugg It?

electricwaffles, on 07/14/2008, -5/+40I'm not sure which is more disturbing. Lennon naked and Ono full clothed, or both of them naked on the Two Virgins cover. There's something inherently creepy about that RollingStone cover.
- gthyb, on 07/15/2008, -1/+7Really? I'm the only one to digg that down? Fine, me and Glen are starting hippie-digg.com
  - arvvvs, on 07/15/2008, -1/+3The John Lennon on was done by Anne something. The same one who did Miley Cyrus.
  - repmekevets, on 07/15/2008, -1/+1i'm right there with you man.. i like that cover. i think it perfectly represents them and what they were trying to accomplish.
- sarge96, on 07/15/2008, -0/+5I would have loved to see the look on some of the religious right's faces when they saw that Kanye West cover.
  
  "Jesus is black?"
  "No honey, Jesus is white, and he drives a 4x4"
sogeshirts, on 07/14/2008, -18/+62I still can't believe that the New Yorker was dumb enough to put that on the cover. Not one editor thought that was a bad idea?
- techblogLAT, on 07/14/2008, -1/+46It got you talking about their magazine. That's the most they could have asked for.
- kakwakas, on 07/15/2008, -4/+34I still don't see what the problem is. I thought it was kinda funny.
  - EntropyFan, on 07/15/2008, -1/+9I think everyone should be offended.
    By the way both political camps and the media in general are treating America.
    Do they truly think we are so ***** stupid we can't get a joke?
    I don't think it was an overly funny joke, but I understood it....
  - KingWilson, on 07/15/2008, -1/+2well too bad its not a god-given right not too be offended whichis how a lot of diggers feel.
- chase001, on 07/15/2008, -3/+19It's called satire. They were mocking Faux "News" and the rest of the corpomedia that tries to make red state America believe the Obamas are Muslim and Liberals. There wasn't this much psuedo-scandal when Faux "News" actually said they were doing a terrorist fist bump.
  - nickbertovich, on 07/15/2008, -3/+1Honestly I can see why the New Yorker chose to run it (see: chase001) but I think it's way too subtle for satire.
  - facelesscoward, on 07/15/2008, -1/+4Please. Michelle Obama with an afro dressed in militant gear. Barack Obama wearing Muslim garb. A picture of Osama bin Laden hanging on the wall. An American flag burning in the fireplace. And to top it all off, a nice little terrorist fist jab in the middle.
    
    If that's subtlety, the future of satire looks grim.
  - nickbertovich, on 07/15/2008, -0/+1facelesscoward: have you seen political cartoons run by anti-Obama crowds? They include the same exact elements. How would you differentiate between the New Yorker and right-leaning pundit cartoons?
  - chase001, on 07/15/2008, -0/+1All of these things are perfectly fine when Fox News insinuates them on a daily basis. How many times have their talking heads accidentally on purpose said Osama instead of Obama? Where was the outrage when Fox News called their dap a terrorist fist jab? Of course right wingers don't understand satire or irony if they did they might understand Fox News is schtick.
- dentz1, on 07/15/2008, -2/+14Satire in the USA = RIP.
  
  Also..... misleading headline. Should have read shocked the "USA", not "world". I know sometimes people confuse the two.
- morningmatters, on 07/15/2008, -0/+7On NPR, the editor of New Yorker said that the cover was satire to expose the myths surrounding Obama campaign. He said that he was got many letters from people who wrote stuff like "we got the satire, but the people in middle country won't". The editor responded that "if most people from Upper West side NYC got it, why shouldn't others get it?"
  
  Apparently most people don't get it.
- flink405, on 07/15/2008, -0/+1Funny stuff!
  Read the article inside the magazine.
  Shocking. Obama nearly getting in physical fights in the Illinois Senate?
- Shivetya, on 07/15/2008, -0/+1It was the perfect idea.
  
  You don't realize the unease the exists people have when criticizing Obama. With scads of mindless zombies willing to heap scorn on anyone who does to the idiot bigot who embarrasses us as a nation.
  
  The point is, NO MAN is above ridicule. NONE. For others to claim so is ignorance, for him to declare so would be audacious.
  
  Of all the covers they showed, the vanity fair one was the most offensive. This New Yorker cover is a yawner.
- TheRealToma, on 07/15/2008, -0/+2Would you like some cheese with your whine?
- gamebittk, on 07/16/2008, -0/+1It was making a joke of the false perceptions and rumors attributed to Obama, more than it was trying to make fun of Obama himself. And I think it's hilarious.
txsln, on 07/14/2008, -1/+6Agreed. I think the fact that the photo is so unsettling contributed more towards its backlash than Lennon's nudity.
ondrik, on 07/15/2008, -2/+3demi moore shook ed? I don't think so....
- cucurrichi1, on 07/15/2008, -0/+1at least paris hilton isn't on the cover of national geographic, right?
ixelr8, on 07/15/2008, -1/+11Weren't these same pictures posted earlier today?
- gl77, on 07/15/2008, -0/+5yes, yes they were. but most diggers seem to have a short memory span and will just blindly digg anything to the front page these days.
- elizabethb221, on 07/15/2008, -0/+3I thought so, too, but it's a different article with some different covers. Meh. What are you going to do?
- unitedstatians, on 07/15/2008, -0/+2Dupe! this one submitted by acmaurer on 07/15/08 with 860 diggs and 133 comments.
  http://digg.com/arts_culture/Before_New_Yorker_s_O ...
iCoty, on 07/15/2008, -2/+11I was expecting to see Demi Moore's pregnant nude Vanity Fair cover on the list....
- DaShow, on 07/15/2008, -0/+1It is, it's the last one. (note that the picture isn't there but read)
ahalbert, on 07/15/2008, -2/+9Im not so sure the Obama picture has shaken the world.....it just came out that's all, what will it matter in the end
dolemite01, on 07/15/2008, -2/+23some of those i can understand, i fail to see how the obama cover 'Shook the World', it was a stupid move, but to say it 'shook the world' is a bit much
cuevas4711, on 07/15/2008, -3/+6Oh no, TERRORIST FIST JAB!
Chompy, on 07/15/2008, -0/+54More like "four significant covers and six more (from affiliates) that we just tossed in there to round the number up to ten."
pheonice, on 07/15/2008, -1/+13I hardly think that a magazine cover that is for THIS WEEK is classified as "shaking the world," especially with just hundreds of comments from MTV.com's users.
amatyarakshasa, on 07/15/2008, -0/+89None of these photos shook the world. A majority of them barely even created a ripple in the United States of America. Buried for the exaggeration.
Gforce20, on 07/15/2008, -10/+3Um, NSFW?
- charm803, on 07/15/2008, -2/+7Um, well, shouldn't you be working and not on digg?
  - Gforce20, on 07/15/2008, -4/+2I'm not at work. I'm just saying that the nudity in the magazine covers would probably be considered NSFW.
  - Gforce20, on 07/15/2008, -3/+1I don't understand, why is this being buried? Does nobody agree that this isn't work-safe?
  - Chompy, on 07/15/2008, -1/+2If your boss has a problem with occasional surfing, then you need to find a new job.
  - Chompy, on 07/15/2008, -0/+2"I don't understand, why is this being buried? Does nobody agree that this isn't work-safe?" The kids stuck working at Best Buy think that all jobs suck as much as theirs does. Don't sweat it, they know not what they speak.
charm803, on 07/15/2008, -0/+9I don't really find the one from EW offensive, and to me, the one with Gisele didn't seem weird.

I think it's the older generation that has a problem with it.
- gthyb, on 07/15/2008, -0/+2Unless you're talking about the generation in their 80s, I'd say it's the younger overly-stereotype-sensitive generation. They mean well, but often their actions have the opposite of their intended effect.
diggerphelps, on 07/15/2008, -0/+5I thought it was funny.
But the Ahmedinejad 'stall' one is funnier.

And if those ten magazine covers 'shook the world' then we humans are a pretty dull species.
mrsammercer, on 07/15/2008, -2/+5#5-I think the LA Times needs to take a better look at the issue date on that Time Magazine. "January 4, 1993"? When one of the headlines says "Monica: Waiting to Testify"? I was a kid back then but there is no way that was 1993. Try 1998, Mind your P's & Q's, jerks!
- DaHuuuuuudge, on 07/15/2008, -0/+4The description was actually referring to this cover:
  http://www.time.com/time/covers/0,16641,19930104,0 ...
  
  It says in the description that the picture to the left is just a similar cover to the one they're talking about and link to the one they were talking about. I really can't figure out why they just didn't make the description of the cover they used or put the other cover to the left.
jjohnstn, on 07/15/2008, -0/+40Shook the world? Someone thinks very highly of themselves....
ZephyrNinety, on 07/15/2008, -0/+9"Tankman" shook the world. These did not.
HencheMann, on 07/15/2008, -3/+13The New Yorker cover is brilliant in spite of its apparent lack of taste. It is a well thought out piece of sharp political satire aimed directly at the eye of Fox News, Hillary Clinton, The Bush Administration, Neo Cons and other conservative knuckle draggers and red state yahoos.

Let's all take a deep breath. No election is going to be decided by political lampoon.
chrisinsocalif, on 07/15/2008, -0/+14What about the national geographic where it had a female with green eyes? That was one of my favorites.
- gavin422, on 07/15/2008, -0/+7I think this list is going for plain controversy. That NG picture was just amazing.
- opensourcer, on 07/15/2008, -0/+5exactly man....those covers just have maybe 15 minutes of fame. but that NG cover, that is priceless. that image basically burnt in our mind with the layers of meaning.
- stinkingfish, on 07/23/2008, -0/+0agreed I can still remember that photo most people will not rememeber any of these covers by next month.
john2kx, on 07/15/2008, -0/+22Did anyone else think #9 was kind of ..... meh ?
- elizabethb221, on 07/15/2008, -0/+2As someone that has read Twilight, I pretty much said "what the *****?" about it, but I wasn't shocked and outraged.
UnMannedMission, on 07/15/2008, -0/+12What about a Lolita-esque Britney Spears on her first cover for Rolling Stone? That sent America into a hypocritical frenzy, I even remember my father saying who would let their daughter out like that though it was the first and last issue of RS he ever bought.
sek52, on 07/15/2008, -1/+4Chances that "one critic on ESPN.com" protesting 4 of 10 was Jemele Hill?

100%
username7410, on 07/15/2008, -6/+24Wow, How big of a douche is Kanye West?! lol
gavin422, on 07/15/2008, -0/+10Premature much? I don't think you can call the Obama/Michelle cover that important until you have a little historical context and hindsight.
yerocfreq, on 07/15/2008, -0/+6Shook the world, what the hell? If the world is this easily shaken then let me off at the next stop. What a bunch of overly sensitive monkeys we are. You wonder why freedom of the press and freedom of speech are a scam, we demand the scam! We, as a whole, don't support those that speak out or break new ground, we never have. We sit by and let them be skewered on the platform of "public opinion" as we look on and say our thanks that it ain't us up there. Shook the world, give me a break.
blankoboy, on 07/15/2008, -4/+25"Shook the world"? You mean "Shook the US". The US is not the world as much as they like to believe they are.
- ukthom, on 07/15/2008, -0/+4thank you for your wider perspective.
- diskit, on 07/15/2008, -0/+5True... aren't these all American magazines?
- flink405, on 07/15/2008, -1/+2Should be shook people that read those magazines.
  And not many did.
Backstgartist, on 07/15/2008, -0/+15My favorite thing is that the Twilight cover is included. WTF?! How is this even important? I'm pretty sure nothing about it "shook the world". Maybe a couple of teenage girls...but not anyone else.
bross29, on 07/15/2008, -0/+2Dugg for body paint.
mit7, on 07/15/2008, -1/+1#5 - is he inconspicuously trying to smell his fingers? With a quizzical look on his face - Hil or Moni?
drape, on 07/15/2008, -2/+3THE WORLD??? Boy, don't I see some USA Presidential qualities in you.
doctordbx, on 07/15/2008, -2/+1I'm guessing they mean 'world' as in 'World Series Basesball' not a in 'the world has 6 billion people'.

Seriously, there is a rest of the world outside the USA you know.
Elihj, on 07/15/2008, -1/+2best one:

number 5 (clinton on time)

Not for the picture but for the quote " IRAQ : the shaky case for the war."
ufaithfull, on 07/15/2008, -1/+2Where's Kurt Cobain on People's Magazine?
- aTTicus78, on 07/15/2008, -1/+3Collecting his thoughts with a squeegee.
noblestrife, on 07/15/2008, -0/+2What happened to the rolling Stone cover with Janet Jackson and her human bra?
RobotKeaton, on 07/15/2008, -0/+5Shook the world? I've never seen most of these.
bcrich999, on 07/15/2008, -0/+4Someone should make a top 10 "Worst top 10 lists" and put this one in there
cnicodemus, on 07/15/2008, -3/+2Demi Moore gives me a boner.
beermaker, on 07/15/2008, -0/+3The world???!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
pond70, on 07/15/2008, -0/+4I dont know what was more shocking .....Hmmmmmm oh I know ..none of them

pretty lame ..
aTTicus78, on 07/15/2008, -1/+3Nine magazine covers that don't matter for *****.

R.I.P John Lennon
sweetits98, on 07/15/2008, -0/+2The twilight cover made the cut...?
GunsGermsSteel, on 07/15/2008, -0/+4How will the world ever recover from that Entertainment Weekly cover on Twilight?
darkane, on 07/15/2008, -0/+5Yeah. LeBron and Gisele making faces. That really shook the ***** world, didn't it? How about some no-name actor covered in powder? It's not that hard to make a top ten list of anything. You shouldn't need filler.
Koushiro, on 07/15/2008, -0/+9Wow, these are the most shocking magazine covers ever? Pretty ***** weak.
NyaraSha, on 07/15/2008, -1/+0to my eye, lennon and ono blow the rest out of the water. call me focused on the artistic and ephemeral, but i think this one is the most affecting, personally. but changing the world? many fall flat.
bloggerjul, on 07/15/2008, -4/+5WOW! KANYE WEST WITHOUT HIS SHADES ON!11!! OMG.... *CAPSLOCK*
diskit, on 07/15/2008, -1/+2Fails for lack of Saturday Evening Posts' "The Problem We All Live With" cover.
bnbr, on 07/15/2008, -0/+4the world seems very sensitive..
welliwonder, on 07/15/2008, -0/+1The "Barack and Michelle" cover isn't shaking the world, it's just kind of disgusting.
Show 51 - 72 of 72 discussions
Login or register to add a comment

Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.

10 magazine covers that shook the world

Login or register to add a comment