(CNN) - A New York Times Magazine cover story about Hillary Clinton was getting reaction online even before the piece was released. But it was the cover itself that has created the buzz.
Clinton's face is set on a planet against a celestial background, surrounded by multiple circles of friends above the headline "Planet Hillary."
Amy Chozick, the New York Times political reporter who wrote the piece, discussed the provocative nature of the cover.
"I didn't pick the cover. But when they showed it to me, I definitely thought, 'Oh, this is going to receive a lot of reaction,' " Chozick said Friday on CNN's "New Day."
[twitter-follow screen_name='politicalticker'][twitter-follow screen_name='psteinhausercnn']
Most likely mindful of the reaction, the magazine explained in an online piece Thursday evening how the cover came about. "When we created the cover of this Sunday's magazine to accompany Amy Chozick's article – to be published online tomorrow – about Hillary Rodham Clinton's influence on the various people within her political universe, the immediate idea that came to mind was Clinton's face embedded on a planet," Arem Duplessis, the magazine's design director wrote.
The provocative cover quickly trended on social networks even before the Friday morning release of the piece online. According to Topsy, a social search and analytics company, as of 8:30 a.m. ET Friday morning, "Planet Hillary" had more than 2,800 mentions on Twitter over the past day. And mentions of Hillary Clinton had topped 6,200 over the past 24 hours, the second-highest total for Clinton in the past month.
Some in the Clinton orbit say the cover is disrespectful.
"It's goofy. It's embarrassing for the magazine. Seventeen out of the last 20 years Hillary Clinton has been voted in the Gallup poll as the most admired women in the world and this is how they depict her?" said Democratic strategist and CNN contributor Paul Begala, a close adviser and friend to Bill and Hillary Clinton for over two decades.
"I'm a strong believer in the free press. They have a perfect right to do it. I just don't get it," Begala said in a separate interview with CNN's Chris Cuomo and Kate Bouldan on "New Day."
The story itself looks at the universe surrounding the Clintons and the challenges in organizing that universe for a potential 2016 president bid by Hillary Clinton.
"I found that the Clintons are unlike any other political family in terms of how they have collected people, literally since Bill Clinton's kindergarten class, they have been collecting friends, advisers, donors, people who feel a stake in now, her future, and want their voices heard. In 2008 we saw a lot of cooks in the kitchen because of this vast network," Chozick told CNN. "So I think the big question is how do you make all these people feel involved and feel heard without creating that same chaos that destroyed her the last time."
Check out what Twitterverse is saying.
- CNN's Eric Weisbrod contributed to this report.
"Clinton lapdog Paul Begala is up in arms over this "disrepect" to his queen."
Really? Haha. Got any quotes from him? I generally like Begala, but this is seriously not something to be butthurt about. NYT Magazine just looks pretty unserious and silly...more of a damaging thing to their own credibility than damaging to Clinton or anyone else.
"I think its funny, partly because of the howls of outrage coming from the predictable posters on here."
Pretty much. I keep hoping one of them will point out that NYTM "forgot all the turtles all the way down."
First, anger is not hate,debate is not hate, and the truth is not hate- although it might sting just a bit.
Second, you cannot put yourself forward as "diagnoser-in-chief", reading into what people say things that simply are not there, then cry persecution.
Great, great points rs! I agree wholeheartedly. Based on your comment, then can we agree that criticism of Obama is born from the same frustration that you speak of and not because he is black nor because we "hate" him? Can't it be due to the exact same reasons that you just gave me? In addition to that, can you please let Sniffit know about your second point because he certainly diagnoses every single anti Obama comment that way and reads it as hatred and racism when, again, he cannot possibly know how people feel based on some comments. Kumbaya, my lord. Kumbaya!
So...........Obama was supposed to be the "Messiah",
Yeah, except the only people who EVER referred to him as the "Messiah" are the rabid right. That being said, the previous occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue was photographed quite frequently with the Presidential seal positioned behind his head so it looked like he was wearing a glowing halo. What's up with that?
I wanted to say I was wrong yesterday to say that you "worship" the govt. It stifles the dialogue and is not constructive. It only makes you defensive and want to fire back without listening to the point I was trying to make. I'd like to try something new and make this a place to hear the other side without feeling that you (or I) have to prove how smart and great we are at the expense of insulting the other side. It's high time we (I think you and I can do this) try to change the tone hear and understand each other better. I will say that I was disappointed for you to throw out the "Rush" comment as I really don't listen to Rush all that much and I also rarely watch Fox News.
The point I was trying to make yesterday is that the article clearly demonstrated how money corrupts BOTH sides. This is not a dem/repub thing as if one is good and the other is bad. BOTH are bad. BOTH most certainly do not have OUR interests at heart. They only want the cash. My confusion and where I would like some insight is that I believe liberals absolutely look to govt for solutions to almost everything now (please feel free to correct me if I'm wrong there but there are several examples I could give that make me feel this way). It doesn't matter the topic. It always goes back to the need for more govt and I don't understand how you would have so much faith in a clearly corrupted institution. Not to mention that although dems now control 2/3 of govt what would happen and how would you feel if/when repubs take over 2/3 of the govt and have all that power?
What I would love to try to accomplish here is to not change your mind; that's foolhardy and simply just not possible. I would love for you to have a better understanding of why conservatives feel the way they do. We're not bad people. We don't hate and we certainly don't all walk in lockstep. I hope this finds you well and we can have a dialogue.
It should also be noted that I am a culprit of the very thing that I chide dems for at times. I'm a human being and I get emotional at times. But my goal is for dialogue here and all this has turned into is anger on both sides.
"And she's for women's rights?"
Well, to be fair to you, freedom ... we've certainly been given an insight to YOUR opinion of women.
Planet Hillary, where all the women wear stained blue dresses and no one wants to be an ambassador...
Kinda freaky and funny .
Hillary is the WORST thing that could happen in 2016.
Do you still have your Bush/Cheney bumper sticker on your car ?
or maybe McCain / Palin ?
So...........Obama was supposed to be the "Messiah", and Hillary is Earth or the Sun?
Thanks for attempting to lower the bar again on conservative research and general aptitude.
– "Messiah" was used by right wingers, not liberals, to ridicule Obama
– It called "Planet" probably not the Earth based on the article, and the Sun is not a planet