If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Reason Magazine)   Was Obamacare endorsed by the Stock Photography industry?   (reason.com) divider line 39
    More: Stupid, obamacare, health insurance exchange, high taxes  
•       •       •

1480 clicks; posted to Politics » on 01 Oct 2013 at 3:10 PM (46 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



39 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2013-10-01 03:14:23 PM
We know the stock photo industry participants that like Reason.

 
2013-10-01 03:14:34 PM
Seriously?  This is the best the echo chamber can come up with?  This is on the level of mustard outrage, fer cryin' out loud.
 
2013-10-01 03:14:55 PM
What?

Were they expecting this?

i457.photobucket.com
 
2013-10-01 03:15:30 PM
So they use stock photographs like every other professional website on the internet?  I'm shocked and outraged!
 
2013-10-01 03:15:39 PM
If this is the shiat that is getting insta-greened, I'd hate to see what's on Total Fark right now.
 
2013-10-01 03:15:47 PM

12349876: We know the stock photo industry participants that like Reason.


Dammit, preview first!

i780.photobucket.com
 
2013-10-01 03:19:18 PM
Wasn't it endorsed by the GOP when they came up with it in the first place?
 
2013-10-01 03:19:24 PM
She's gonna need Obamacare.

25.media.tumblr.com


They definitely need Obamacare.

25.media.tumblr.com


He's not at all happy about Obamacare.

25.media.tumblr.com


Mmmmm, Obamacare.

31.media.tumblr.com
 
2013-10-01 03:19:51 PM
Dems using stock photos as stock photos: Outrage!

Republicans using stock photos and specifically misrepresenting them as not stock photos: Totally fine!

That's some nice Reasoning there, Reason.
 
2013-10-01 03:20:54 PM
In Rhode Island, this boy can't stop cheesing

Obamacare covers cat-pee huffing. Thanks Libs
 
2013-10-01 03:20:58 PM
i.imgur.com
 
2013-10-01 03:21:09 PM
Reason, the brave libertarians who just today were bemoaning the fact that Obama cannot exert total political control over government:  http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2013/10/confused-libertarian-dem a nds-strongman.html
 
2013-10-01 03:22:44 PM
I suppose the Romney campaign photoshopping in larger crowds is better than just using professional photos for images.
 
2013-10-01 03:24:10 PM

Albino Squid: Reason, the brave libertarians who just today were bemoaning the fact that Obama cannot exert total political control over government:  http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2013/10/confused-libertarian-dem a nds-strongman.html


More evidence supporting my theory that modern Libertarians are just Republicans who want legal weed.
 
2013-10-01 03:25:03 PM
I would never have even heard of this POS blog without Fark.

But the impotence of this pathetic mewling is deeply satisfying. I think they realize they're f*cked.
 
2013-10-01 03:28:58 PM
5 signs you'll have a heart attack while signing up for Obamacare:

i.istockimg.com
 
2013-10-01 03:31:40 PM

Snapper Carr: Albino Squid: Reason, the brave libertarians who just today were bemoaning the fact that Obama cannot exert total political control over government:  http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2013/10/confused-libertarian-dem a nds-strongman.html

More evidence supporting my theory that modern Libertarians are just Republicans who want legal weed.


That's so untrue... Many are just confederates that don't like to use that word.
 
2013-10-01 03:31:45 PM
They should have hired a very expensive firm to provide photos that look like stock photos rather than spend tens of dollars on stock images?

The derp, it never sleeps.
 
2013-10-01 03:31:51 PM

Sybarite: She's gonna need Obamacare.




They definitely need Obamacare.




He's not at all happy about Obamacare.




Mmmmm, Obamacare.


The alignment of those last two photos is farking priceless...
It's like Bob Uecker is stripping in the office.
 
2013-10-01 03:32:13 PM
i.imgur.com
 
2013-10-01 03:33:04 PM
Is there any reason to read Reason?

Hey Reason,  health insurance companies use stock photos all the friggin time
 
2013-10-01 03:33:33 PM

Snapper Carr: Albino Squid: Reason, the brave libertarians who just today were bemoaning the fact that Obama cannot exert total political control over government:  http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2013/10/confused-libertarian-dem a nds-strongman.html

More evidence supporting my theory that modern Libertarians are just Republicans who want legal weed.



Well, you have to admit he looks pretty happy.
upload.wikimedia.org
 
2013-10-01 03:36:54 PM
t0.gstatic.com
Today's GOP
 
2013-10-01 03:39:32 PM
If i had to go by those stock photos, you are only able to get Obamacare benefits if you have an interracial baby.
 
2013-10-01 03:43:02 PM
img360.imageshack.us

Websites are frequently designed using stock photos.
 
2013-10-01 04:00:41 PM
i44.tinypic.com
 
2013-10-01 04:04:40 PM
They had two legitimate choices:

1) Make every website page a solid wall of text.
2) Move forward in time, find some real people that are happy with their existing obamacare exchanges, take pictures, return to the present.
 
2013-10-01 04:06:36 PM
So they saved money by using stock photos instead of hiring models. I'm supposed to be upset that they saved money? Or, am I supposed to be upset that they didn't build a time machine, go into the future (2014 at least) to find someone who was using Obamacare, bring those people back to our time, and then take photos of them? Because that would cost a lot more than even hiring models for one-off photo shoots?

Either way, though, ReaKoch would like us to be upset that Obamacare saved money on its website, so I guess I will have to dial up my outrage. Unfortunately, the government shutdown has blocked my access to new supplies of outrage.
 
2013-10-01 04:26:03 PM
As you can imagine, the comments are mostly about the kids not being white enough.
 
2013-10-01 04:33:47 PM
It must warm the hearts of the Reason staff to see how far their magazine has fallen into the hands of people whose racism so overflows that it cannot be left off the comments of even the most unrelated content. Long gone are the days of essays on the meaning of a passage from Locke, debate as to whether libertarians should support or oppose intellectual "property" laws, or *ahem* whether affirmative action was improper economic interference or legitimate payback for a property crime of historical proportions. No, now the magazine no longer has to tackle the philosophical underpinnings of the classical liberal philosophy, as it has certainty and hatred as its guide.
 
2013-10-01 04:42:07 PM

Darkwing: As you can imagine, the comments are mostly about the kids not being white enough.


Holy moly, you aren't kidding!

Check out the thoughtful libertarians who just want lower taxes and smaller government.

Neoliberal Kochtopus|10.1.13 @ 11:45AM|#
All of these children are apparently *ahem* heroic mulattoes.

Neoliberal Kochtopus|10.1.13 @ 11:50AM|#
Mixed children are really popular with advertisers for some reason.

Sharke|10.1.13 @ 12:04PM|#
Advertisers seem to LOVE mixed race kids with coffee colored skin and "springy" hair that is exactly halfway between straight and nappy.

Killazontherun|10.1.13 @ 12:27PM|#
You mean, there are still white women out there who will have sex with you unhyphenated white guys? Don't they care about what people will think about them?


Free Society|10.1.13 @ 11:55AM|#
Only biracial children need apply.

Paul.|10.1.13 @ 11:56AM|#
Deadly serious question: In that middle photo, if the husband were to shoot a black person in a confrontation, would he be white?

LiberTarHeel|10.1.13 @ 12:00PM|#
Onest agin, gummint duz it fer the chilrun!

Outlaw|10.1.13 @ 12:22PM|#
"OUR LORD AND SAVIOR BARACK OBAMA IS HALF-WHITE SO LET'S USE A TON OF PICTURES OF MULATTOES IN HIS HONOR!"

Ranter|10.1.13 @ 12:23PM|#
Yep, coming from someone who works in advertising, mixed race guy/gal with springy hair and crazy glasses is CATNIP for editorial approvers.
Ugh. It's so goddamn trendy and transparent.
 
2013-10-01 05:20:17 PM
This is an appropriate use for stock photography repubs. You know, unlike using a stock photograph to represent a specific and entirely imaginary person you claim endorses your position. Try to keep up.
 
2013-10-01 05:20:59 PM

A Dark Evil Omen: Dems using stock photos as stock photos: Outrage!

Republicans using stock photos and specifically misrepresenting them as not stock photos: Totally fine!

That's some nice Reasoning there, Reason.


Did you just use a Tu Quoque fallacy to accuse someone of fallacious reasoning?
 
2013-10-01 05:28:36 PM
Some stock photographs are quite interesting:
upload.wikimedia.org
Others are more sinister...
upload.wikimedia.org
"Obamacare will hold you down while townspeople hurl rotting vegetables at you!"
 
2013-10-01 06:09:53 PM

Snarfangel: Some stock photographs are quite interesting:
[upload.wikimedia.org image 800x524]
Others are more sinister...
[upload.wikimedia.org image 499x599]
"Obamacare will hold you down while townspeople hurl rotting vegetables at you!"


More stock photography:

www.beefexcellence.com
 
2013-10-01 08:11:54 PM
I wonder if they hold those stacks of stock photos together with b-b-b-binder clips.
 
2013-10-01 10:18:47 PM

Darkwing: As you can imagine, the comments are mostly about the kids not being white enough.


The criticism and the comments are the most honest thing about this "debate."
 
2013-10-02 12:43:27 AM

MadCat221: Seriously?  This is the best the echo chamber can come up with?  This is on the level of mustard outrage, fer cryin' out loud.


I think it was supposed to be humor, but at the same time, what ARE the states supposed to out on their websites? Even snark is kind of stupid at this point, because if they hadn't used stock photos, then these guys would have been making fun of them for that.

Just another side effect of the 24-hour news cycle, a made up story is better than not having one. They feel the need to come up with 'X' new stories each day, and sometimes all they do is post an updated story as if it's brand new and leave the original up. I've even seen the same story, just with a different headline, otherwise word for word identical. It gets really annoying when you think it might have a few new (or old) details to add, so you click on it, and it's the same farking story. It's even worse when the headline on the sidebar is different, but it reloads the exact story you were on, complete with the same headline. I hate getting played like a farking fool so these worthless asshats can get page clicks.

Newspapers took a serious chunk out of the world of journalism when they started acting like websites. No editors, no integrity, might as well get our news from TMZ, it's the same quality.
 
2013-10-02 12:53:07 AM

ex0du5: It must warm the hearts of the Reason staff to see how far their magazine has fallen into the hands of people whose racism so overflows that it cannot be left off the comments of even the most unrelated content. Long gone are the days of essays on the meaning of a passage from Locke, debate as to whether libertarians should support or oppose intellectual "property" laws, or *ahem* whether affirmative action was improper economic interference or legitimate payback for a property crime of historical proportions. No, now the magazine no longer has to tackle the philosophical underpinnings of the classical liberal philosophy, as it has certainty and hatred as its guide.


Part of it is political, part of it so just the way that every news outlet is trying to follow the Buzzfeed model of success.

Either way, there's a definite decline.
 
Displayed 39 of 39 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report