Controversial Cover on MOA ON

[RocketMan]

Unfortunatley, we're seeing a societal shift, much of it driven by the left wing news media, toward intolerance; where simply having a computer and Twitter account gives the 1 percenters a voice that is amplified 1000 times. While I respect healthy discourse, I don't believe this club should bow in an effort to appease a vocal few with chips on their shoulders. You can't run any organization while "walking on egg shells," for fear you're going to offend someone. Instead, use common sense and adhere to the principles on which this club was founded. For those that were offended, you have a choice, either get over it, or find an organization that better aligns with your view of the world...the latter may be a challenge.

I don't see this issue as in any way political, its a social issue. Nor is this being Caused by the media, left, right or otherwise, and certainly not by the News Media. The Media is simply the vehicle that provides the means by which the 1%'ers give voice to their negativity; in this case strictly thru social media, be it forums, blogs, twitter, FB. etc. Certainly some may well be further emboldened by seeing others posting negative comments, but as I said before, they have always been out there, the only difference is they now have the means to reach a much wider audience and feed off of each other.
I've noticed a definitive trend in much of my reading of such media, when the initial responses to any comment, post, etc, are negative, the tread for following posts tends to stay negative, while if the first ones are positive the trend is for following posts to be in a similar vain with perhaps a greater trend for the negative to remain negative simply because those types seem more drawn to voicing their caustic remarks on social media whereas people with more positive outlooks seem tire of such and prefer not to get involved and move on to other topics. it is that trend for negative to stay negative (and often based on poor or totally false data) that has caused me to involve myself less and less with such media. There is way to much beauty to be discovered and fascinating topics to be pursued that are far more worthy of one attention. Sad thing is that sense of anonymity held by negative posters is really a fallacy as shown many times when it devolves into or involves some illegal act. IP addresses, user accounts, etc are easily traced by those with the right tools. Idiocy tends to be self-canceling as it were!

RM

[Chiba]

I have to disagree with you, RM. I think it is definitely being driven by the media - giving voice to the cranks, malcontents and troublemakers is how they drive their ratings up.

Media is not about news - it's about ratings, whether that be views or clicks.

[RocketMan]

I have to disagree with you, RM. I think it is definitely being driven by the media - giving voice to the cranks, malcontents and troublemakers is how they drive their ratings up.

Media is not about news - it's about ratings, whether that be views or clicks.

On your second point I completely agree, in fact sometime ago i read a very interesting article about that very subject that went into detail about how that change came about in the news media. A change that started way back before the interweb even as early as the 70's. Specifically, up until the advent of shows such as Good Morning America and the Today Show, news was seen by the broadcast media (the major mass media of its time) more as a social, ethical obligation to Inform the public and it was accepted that is was basically a losing proposition, i.e. not a source of income for the producers. The popularity of those early shows quickly changed the tide when they realized that those forms of "News presentations" could in fact generate/increase viewership and thus increasing ratings (which translates into a source of income) quickly became the norm and now drives much of the news media (in All its forms). As for Social media, ratings (translated into "Views" or "hits") has always driven social media in its current form.
My point was that mass media, specifically Social media did not create the cranks, the disenfranchised, the malcontents, they have always been there, as have existed in any society, it has simply given them a greater voice. So in yes in that sense it is "driven" by media, I guess I see "driven by" as different than "created" by and again on that point I agree. And yes, it is most definitely being exacerbated by that media, but again the underlying cause is much more complex and has much to do with changes in our society driven by other issues, a discussion of which would take us down another road best left for other areas.
RM

[JimVonBaden]

To Wes and Jeff's point, what if this had been a black woman? Would anyone have had the nerve to complain if the photo was otherwise identical but a black woman instead? I highly doubt it, because the racist term would have come into play. For that matter, what about an obviously sexy and attractive man in similarly un-rider like attire? Would the women, or men, be up in arms about that? I highly doubt it.

Both Jeff and Wes seem to agree that it is the 1% that grabs the attention, whether promoted, or just reported, by the media, the effect is similar! Sad, IMHO, that people can't just relax and enjoy a nicely artistic photo without getting all up in arms. Next thing we know people are complaining about who uses what bathroom!

Jim

[bdimon]

To Wes and Jeff's point, what if this had been a black woman? Would anyone have had the nerve to complain if the photo was otherwise identical but a black woman instead? I highly doubt it, because the racist term would have come into play. For that matter, what about an obviously sexy and attractive man in similarly un-rider like attire? Would the women, or men, be up in arms about that? I highly doubt it.

Both Jeff and Wes seem to agree that it is the 1% that grabs the attention, whether promoted, or just reported, by the media, the effect is similar! Sad, IMHO, that people can't just relax and enjoy a nicely artistic photo without getting all up in arms. Next thing we know people are complaining about who uses what bathroom!

Jim

Actually somebody on the BMWMOA Facebook page already claimed that people who thought the cover was respectable were not only sexist but racist as well. They claimed that if you were one, you were the other.

[JimVonBaden]

Why does this not surprise me?

I don't want to be around people anymore, they have lost their minds!

Jim

[Gtr]

To Wes and Jeff's point, what if this had been a black woman? Would anyone have had the nerve to complain if the photo was otherwise identical but a black woman instead? I highly doubt it, because the racist term would have come into play. For that matter, what about an obviously sexy and attractive man in similarly un-rider like attire? Would the women, or men, be up in arms about that? I highly doubt it.

Both Jeff and Wes seem to agree that it is the 1% that grabs the attention, whether promoted, or just reported, by the media, the effect is similar! Sad, IMHO, that people can't just relax and enjoy a nicely artistic photo without getting all up in arms. Next thing we know people are complaining about who uses what bathroom!

Jim

Actually somebody on the BMWMOA Facebook page already claimed that people who thought the cover was respectable were not only sexist but racist as well. They claimed that if you were one, you were the other.

"Somebody" clearly has some much bigger personal issues they need to work through. In the absence of that; as Clint Eastwood told Spike Lee, who indicated Sands of Iwo Jima wasn't diverse enough, "shut your face."

[Banshee]

three things.

tighten up that chin strap.
put on some gloves, fingerless is fine, I understand, show off that manicure.
the heels are dumb, a pair of purple doc martens on the other hand would give her some actual cred and look great with those tights.

I would have preferred the illusion that she just rolled up on the bike and got shot candidly, instead of clearly posing for a picture.

other than that it's a fun, colorful and modern cover.

[Slider]

No centerfold?

[rickrwh]

For that matter, what about an obviously sexy and attractive man in similarly un-rider like attire? Would the women, or men, be up in arms about that? I highly doubt it.

Anybody offended?

[JimVonBaden]

For that matter, what about an obviously sexy and attractive man in similarly un-rider like attire? Would the women, or men, be up in arms about that? I highly doubt it.

Anybody offended?

Yes, this is not a BMW!

[Gtr]

For that matter, what about an obviously sexy and attractive man in similarly un-rider like attire? Would the women, or men, be up in arms about that? I highly doubt it.

Anybody offended?

Offended no...but did just throw up in my mouth a little bit