When I was editor and executive director of Spare Change News in Boston, we published two of the infamous Mohammed cartoons along with an editorial that explained our decision and criticized other local newspapers for not doing the same. (See here, here and here for background.) I have always stood by our decision.
Now it seems that an Opus cartoon is causing controversy, albeit on a smaller scale. The Washington Post, along with more than twenty other newspapers, refused to publish the cartoon, in which a character becomes a “radical Islamist.” The Post did not state a reason for pulling the cartoon, but we can presume that the newspaper did not want to offend Muslims.
I have three reactions. Firstly, the cartoon does not insult Islam. When taken in context, it pokes fun at people, like the character in question, who adopt a new cause (or religion or whatever) every week, and Islam was simply the religion du jour. In addition, Lola’s statements in the sixth and seventh frames on what her boyfriend will not be “getting” from a Muslim girlfriend portray Islam in a positive light. (The anti-feminist comment in the eighth frame may also be viewed in the same way, depending on one’s political views.)
Secondly, the sexual innuendo in the last frame, which some newspapers had given as another reason for not running the cartoon, is subtle enough that anyone who would get the joke would likely not be offended. Neither the language nor the images were explicit. The United States needs to become less prudish.
Thirdly, the media in general need to become less worried about offending people of any religion, ethnicity, race or other minority group. People have become much too serious and politically correct. We need to remember to laugh, and sometimes this type of humor can even prove a serious point. (See here for an earlier post on this topic following the Don Imus scandal.)
Americans worry about offending people in Muslim and Arab countries when in fact newspapers in those countries — many of which are state-run — publish the most vile, disgusting, anti-Semitic cartoons imaginable (see here and here and here for examples). There is certainly an element of hypocrisy here — the anti-Semitic cartoons are certainly more offensive than the cartoons depicting the Prophet Mohammad, but Jews did not riot in response. The main reason that I personally wanted Spare Change to run the cartoons was to point out that the reaction to the cartoons was much worse than the images themselves.
Whenever newspapers decide not to publish an item out of fear — as The Boston Phoenix stated in an editorial during the Mohammed Cartoon controversy — they are abandoning their mission to the public. Whenever newspapers pull any content that may offend someone, then that is the day that newspapers become bland and lifeless.
Update: Here we go again.
