Malia and Sasha Pop Up on Teenie Mag Cover (Yea or Nay)

It has begun!

Malia & Sasha make the cover of Teen Magazine M.

They’ve been featured with their famous mom and dad, but this marks their first solo appearance – (a small one but worth noting.)

I expect them to take up much more real estate on the cover of teen magazines in the future. This is just the beginning.

(Source: Cover Awards blog)

The picture is small and the First Daughters have been featured in teenie bopper mags before, but this is the first inkling of them making the cover. On one hand, considering the overall damn near monochrome imagery of this busybody mag cover (Save Selena Gomez and the Werewolf boy from the Twilight franchise, everyone on there is white), isn’t it nice for our tweens to see some brown faces on the cover … even if they are tucked away in a tiny picture at the top?

OR …

Are you horrified, as the Obama girls are private citizens, not celebrities, and you fear this is just another slippery slope to magazines not only using their parents to push paper, but the girls themselves, opening them up for ever more scrutiny when they’re not even out of elementary school? (To be in a teenie mag when you’re barely a “tween?”)

We all love to look act pictures of the First Daughters and hearing stories about them. We look how they look like normal girls, are dressed age appropriate and behave like little kids, but where do you think the press needs to draw the line between casual First Family interest and invasion of privacy?

I’m torn on the issue, as when I was a kid nearly all the black teen celebs who made these sorts of magazines (if they did) were typically entertainers, like Boys II Men or All 4 One. Other than that, it was nothing but white kids and you had to go find a copy of Fresh or Right On to get your does of vintage Tevin Campbell, Usher Raymond, Aaliyah and a pre-Disney Raven Simone. But once again, entertainers, not regular kids. Young, child me would have loved some little black girls to look up to.

But where do you draw the line between positive images for black and brown kids in the media and the need for the Obama girls to have their privacy?

23 thoughts on “Malia and Sasha Pop Up on Teenie Mag Cover (Yea or Nay)

  1. As long as they asked for permision first to feature a small picture. If you blink you would have missed it. Both Clintons and Bush had there kids featured on the coverof a teen mag on a number of occasions so it isn’t anything different. And they still had thier privacy respected. Should be no different for President Obama’s daughters

  2. NAY NAY NAY!!! Mama is NOT going to be happy about thisThis is a magazine where celebrities appear, and I moat certainly think this is inappropriate for the first kids to appear on there, especially when their parents are trying to protect them from the media glare…did they get permission from the first couple for this? i doubt itIM SQUARELY IN THE NAY CAMP….im sure their parents are not happy about it, it only invites unwanted attention,and considering their parents are trying to retain some sort of normalcy for their kids, this is NOT COOL!!!

  3. So they’ve decided to pounce on Malia and Sasha. I see this as no source of pride. These magazines are just junior versions of Star, Us, and other gossip rags that contrive drama and lies in order to make sales.

  4. My 9 y.o. step-daughter wants to be friends the Malia and Sasha so that she can go to a sleepover at the White House. Given that their generation is all Jonas Brothers and Radio Disney, I don’t think its inappropriate for the Obama girls to be in or on the cover of this type of magazine, as long as the papparazzi is not chasing them down Britney Spears’ style while they’re at school. Also even though they are still private citizens, the Obama girls are not regular kids, their Dad is the President which makes them as "famous" as any of those other "stars" on the cover.

  5. NAYthey are not child actors or athletes or celebrities they are children and their parents are trying to give them as normal an upbringing as possible.

  6. NAY!!! It’s called setting a precedence by getting a foot in the crack of the media access door.Shoot em in the pinky toe today or have the teen Obama girls being chased by sleezy photographers tomorrow.and another emphatic Nay! to sneeking Bill Bellamy does pretty boy pics onto the wall of sexy. I’ve seen 2 of them already. I’m not saying Bill isn’t sexy -I’m just saying the Shemar effeminate lipglossy posing is NOT a good look.

  7. mmmmm Nay.. there is something super creepy about them being on this cover.. I am still slightly upset that these kids are a little bit of everywhere when other presidential kiddies have been hidden

  8. I’m not really horrified. Don’t we do the same thing when we coo over pictures of them hosted on various blogs (including this one?) And I’m right up there cooing, don’t get me wrong. The picture used was clearly taken at a public place; it’s not like a pap was waiting in a hidden alley for them. I agree that a line needs to be drawn before we get to an invasion of privacy, but I don’t think this magazine cover is the line.

  9. Oh for God’s sake, can these little girls GET INTO THEIR TEENS, before the media flings them into adolescence?! Malia is only 11, she is not a teen, and Sasha at 7 isn’t even a ‘tween’ yet. If they didn’t get permission, they watch out for an irate First Lady–because Mrs. Obama doesn’t play, God love her!!

  10. @ The ALOL! Hey. Some folks like Bill’s weird, lip gloss pictures. I don’t get it either, but it is a KIND of sexy methinks! Or … I thought he was hot back when he worked from MTV and did the "Booty Call" concert, entering the term into the lexicon and paving the way to that horrid Jamie Foxx/Tommy Davidson collabo. To think, Jamie has an OSCAR now. And he did "Booty Call."

  11. I don’t think Michelle Obama has to grant permission any more than she has to give permission for the kid’s pics to be posted on the cute gallery at the bottom of this page. The only person whose permission is/was needed is the photographer’s. As long as these were pictures taken at public events where there is some reasonable expectation that there’d be photographers — looks like these were taken at the Democratic convention — I don’t really have a problem with it. I don’t condone prying into their lives or making them People cover stories…then again, they already have been on the cover of People, presumably with the family’s permission since Barack was in the photo, and you can’t unring a bell.

  12. Horrifieds sickened to say that they should all die is to be to kind. all the work you did to find them models and they can’t see value beyond the tip of thier nose.

  13. Horrifieds sickened to say that they should all die is to be to kind. all the work you did to find them models and they can’t see value beyond the tip of thier nose.

  14. I have to vote nay. I hope Michelle nips this in the bud. She seems to be raising them the old fashioned way and I hope she can continue. Let them be innocents as long as possible.

  15. I’m horrified, Snob. Only pics I want to see of the WeeMichelles are those authorized by The White House. When I wrote about President Obama being the first Celebrity President of the 24 hour media cycle, I did express horror for The First Daughters. This is an example of it. They are 10 and 7 for pete’s sake. Leave them the hell alone.

  16. Devil’s advocate: so what about the gallery just posted by NAGROM? Is that kind of thing out of bounds as well? Are we saying that we just don’t want to see pictures of the girls any more, or that magazines should not put their images on their covers? If there were no cover images but just a story inside, would that be better?

  17. I feel like I am arguing on behalf of intrusiveness. I’m really not. It’s just that — I have to face it — I love to see pictures of those kids. I don’t want to see them chased by paps, but I think they’re adorable. I just feel hypocritical if I don’t acknowledge that I’m part of the "problem."

  18. @ ChristinaThat was the dilemma that I was speaking of. We all love to look at pictures of the First Daughters, but we want them to have some privacy. The hard part IS drawing a line. As I wrote, I would have LOVED to see little girls who looked like me in such a high profile position when I was their age. I was reading friggin’ "Sweet Valley High Twins" and watching TIffany and Debbie Gibson videos. Blossom was my fashion icon in Junior High. But I want the girls to have lives separate from my gawking. We’re all part of the problem in a way.

  19. I think the media should leave the Obama girls alone they are very young and not pop stars However, Danielle did you know Michelle is on the cover of People’s Magazine ths week talking about her family?I don’t understand Mrs. Obama she says she wants privacy for her daughters YET she is inviting the attention. I don’t understand why Mrs. Obama is once again on the cover of People’s Magazine? Mrs. Obama needs to back off from the press and let the media hype quiet down a bit.

  20. I’m divided on this. While they certainly do not get anything for being on the magazine, and their parents wants them to have privacy, the reality is they are the first family and the population, in this case other little kids, want to know more about that. While the President certainly has a right as a dad to say that the press should keep their distance, Teen Mag and others like them are not like conventional political journalism, where there are a set of standards. I think the Obamas can work around and find a way to give the people what they want and still keep their privacy.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Back to top
%d bloggers like this: