Especially considering that she has nothing to do with the pseudo cover story about the expanding waistline of Canadians, nor is she particularly obese herself.
The problem that I have with Maclean's cover of October 4, is that the depiction of Bonhomme Carnaval is gratuitous and uncalled for.
Maclean's has always used provocative covers to grab magazine buyers' attention. It's a tough market out there for the print media, especially magazines, so pushing the envelope is one way to create some buzz and interest..
No one can deny that this week's cover certainly grabbed national attention. but was it ethical?
I don't think so, not at all.
There have been Maclean's covers in the past depicting George Bush dressed up as Saddam Hussein, but the ex-president was fair game. Bonhomme is not.
Bonhomme Carnival doesn't deserve to be portrayed as a 'bag man,' just because the mascot is a famous and familiar Quebec symbol.
It reminds me of those vulgar portrayals of the Simpsons characters, cast in various lewd and sexual positions, floating around the Internet.
Not something that a mainstream news magazine should be involved with, under any circumstances.
Now Maclean's claims to have gotten permission to use the iconic symbol, but it's clear that they either lied to the rights holder about their intentions or made an egregious sin of omission, both cases equally unpardonable.
If I was the Quebec Carnival organizers, I wouldn't hesitate to sue. There may be a case to be made that the magazine engaged deception. There is no way that the Carnival would knowingly allow their beloved mascot be bastardized this way.
If Maclean's fooled them, let them admit it in court.
It is a case of journalistic misrepresentation bordering on fraud.
In the end, the magazine did itself a disservice, allowing the articles to be framed by the offensive cover and altering the debate from corruption in Quebec to Quebec-bashing.
If you haven't read to two articles related to the cover, here they are.
Quebec: The most corrupt province.
Before I comment on the actual stories and the reaction in Quebec, I'm going to do something different.
I going to let readers comment before me.
My question to all is this.
WAS THE MACLEAN'S ARTICLE AND THE RELATED COVER, A CASE OF QUEBEC-BASHING, OR NOT?