Yesterday I mentioned the potential problems that come with giving airtime to climate change deniers. While giving credence to junk climate science can get people killed in the long run, publishing offenses to Islam tends to get people killed in more immediate ways.
The New York Times reports this morning that the French satirical magazine, Charlie Hebdo, printed some cartoons that mock the Prophet Mohammed. Usual debates over free speech, tact, and appropriate reactions will ensue.
Something, I think, interesting about reporting on this subject is that the Times won't dare show its readers what these cartoons look like. Not that they should, and reporters Nicola Clark and Scott Sayare give enough of a description for readers to get the idea.
The Times might defend its decision not to print the images without even considering potential violent reactions, on the same grounds that it can reasonably avoid printing other images that might be offensive. This case is different, though, because while some other offensive images might be printed because of their news value (consider a recent image from the Times' home page showing the aftermath of the Empire State Building shooting), I can't imagine that the Times would ever print something like a cartoon mocking the Prophet, regardless of how important to the story showing such an image would be.
No comments:
Post a Comment