Friday, February 03, 2006
Good news and Bad news
The Good News:
A Jordanian Paper shows "those cartoons".
Yay!
The Bad News:
The Editor is sacked. And all copies of the paper pulled from the stands.
Boo!
UPDATE: Sun morning. The Editor is arrested. Anyone still wondering if this isn't a Freedom of Speech issue?
The Really Shocking News:
The Strawman grabs his ankles.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
Hmmm... Jack Straw made an interesting point.
Most newspapers are publishing these as a protest against censorship, rather than any sentiments about fundamentalist Islam.
It is, perhaps, a little crass. It shouldn't be a sackable offence - after all, we have the right to voice our opinions - but it definitely should be something that the cartoonist should've been asked to contemplate a little longer. It wasn't very circumspect...
Freedom of Speech aside - It's simply going to stir up more extremists. I don't look forward to that.
I can't speak Danish, but... cool cartoons...
Belle de Jour,
It's both actually. These cartoons were only published because the Danes realised that too much in the way of Free Speech had already been conceded to the fundamentalists.
Remember that the author could not find anyone to illustrate his book with RESPECTFUL pictures as all those he approached declined for fear of death threats.
It was the debate resulting from this that prompted JP to request and then publish these cartoons.
"but it definitely should be something that the cartoonist should've been asked to contemplate a little longer. It wasn't very circumspect..."
It is clear from this line in your comment that you are not aware of this background. Does this change your view?
I'm aware of the background, though concede I hadn't fully thought it through. I'm aware that the government are being particularly "paternal" of late - trying to swaddle us all in cotton wool and tell us that we have a right to an opinion, but not to express it if someone might take exception to it - and above all, trying to legislate its paternal sentiments by outlawing "incitement to religious hatred" - if only they could define what exactly that is...
But it was perhaps just a wee bit too audacious - picturing Mohammed.
The guy shouldn't have been sacked - but I still think it was rather silly. There would have been many other ways to cartoon the situation. The author was obviously made aware of the fact that he was playing with fire (with all the people declining his offer). Although perhaps he felt he ought to test his Free Speech to the limit. Brave of him. And I suppose good on him, for standing up for our rights on that one.
Humour is often offensive. I know and share quite a few non-PC jokes at will (Did you hear about the dyslectic who walked into a bra?) - but one also has to be circumspect about these things. Doesn't one?
We all practise self-censorship on a daily basis - 'cause we're clever, and social. For example, I won't tell my grandmother that I think her soup is "fucking rank", or if my friend's arse looks humungus in those jeans...
Perhaps if I was worried about the government trying to legislate against telling a girl her posterior looks big I might also scoff and make cartoons on the topic. But even at that - women taking offense at being told their bottom is large can hardly be compared to ruffling Fundamentalists' feathers (and possibly invititing suicide bombers and assassins. When you put it that way it sounds almost foolhardy).
In reference to an older essay of yours - do you think that offence was intended? If not, was it sensible?
Belle de Jour,
"We all practise self-censorship on a daily basis - 'cause we're clever, and social. "
A perfectly valid point in general, but it is not complete. There is no need to tell your grandmother her soup is rank because her soup is not threatening your freedom of speech.
I am assuming that aforementioned soup is not SO rank as to cause irreparable lesions on the brain, where perhaps some moderate condemnation might be in order - though hitting her would not.
;-)
I'll post on this in greater length in due course.
PG
Yeah - s'pose - with all the "Freedom of expression: Go To Hell" crap.
Still - I would have made the cartoons satirise self-censorship and the touchy-feely approach to Muslims in general, rather than a depicting Mohammad.
Not wholly out of my own good will, or political correctness - but because I'd know that it would cause a death threat or two to come my way. Apparently the guy is in hiding now.
[Just reads] Oh Jebus Cripes! Arrested [shakes head] - now that is just bollocks. What are they gonna charge him with, exactly?
Oh, and call me Heather, if you like. Or just continue with Belle de Jour if you like.
I'm gonna change my nick if I can. It's either bad French grammar, or it's correct if it means "day belle"/"belle of day" - which is unlikely. It most like should be Belle du Jour.
It is the pseudonym of an upper class prostitute who got some "Blog of The Year" award.
*[most] likely
Post a Comment