Let's Discuss: Race and that 'Vogue' Cover

The controversy around April's Vogue cover featuring an angry-looking LeBron James clutching a slinky Gisele Bundchen refuses to die down, and now the NAACP has weighed in.

Spokesman Richard McIntire comes down, gingerly, on the side of those who think the magazine intentionally touched the racial third rail to give the issue a little extra frisson. "In some ways, it's obvious that [King] Kong poster-type image is there," he tells WWD, adding that the group concerns itself with "weightier issues."

James himself, meanwhile, has has pooh-poohed the protests, as has Vogue, which says the photo "celebrates athleticism" and nothing more.

Who's right? On one hand, it's hard to imagine that any purveyor of images as sophisticated as Annie Leibovitz could fail to anticipate that the photo would push buttons by calling to mind certain stereotypes -- the bestial black man, the supposed erotic affinity of black men for white women and vice versa, and so on. One suspects the shot was meant as a bit of playful (rather than spiteful) provocation.

On the other hand, to single out Vogue for portraying James as mean and angry is to ignore a much wider trend of sports marketing that focuses on violence and conflict and depicts athletes as rage-filled warriors. Had the exact same photo of James appeared on the cover of ESPN The Magazine, sans Bundchen, no one would've batted an eye; conversely, had Vogue paired the two but had him calm and smiling, the stereotype police would probably still have sounded the alarm, albeit in smaller numbers.

Commenters, what's your take?