The American Media Must Publish Cartoons Of The Prophet Muhammad
Robert Paul Reyes
February 07, 2006
It is the obligation of a newspaper, magazine, Web site or TV station to present all the pertinent facts of an issue.
If a presidential candidate is accused of having an extramarital affair, and there are incriminating photographs, it is incumbent on the media to publish the images.
Freedom of the press and the public's right to know trumps concern for any embarrassment the pictures may cause the presidential candidate and his family.
In a previous essay I lamented CNN's hypocrisy in failing to publish the cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad. In an online article about the controversy CNN had this disclaimer: "CNN has chosen to not show the cartoons out of respect for Islam."
In a March 27, 2000 article published online by CNN they published an image of Chris Ofili's "The Holy Virgin Mary." The artist used elephant dung and images of female genitalia in that work.
It's not just CNN that has developed a yellow streak. almost all of the American media has refused to publish the cartoons.
The editor of the New York Times should not be obsessed with the reaction of the Muslim world if he publishes the caricatures, he should be more concerned with living up to his paper's ideal of publishing "all the news that's fit to print."
I have seen the cartoons depicting the Prophet Muhammad, and in my opinion they qualify as valid political satire. But most Americans have not seen the cartoons, and we need to see them to understand what the turmoil is all about.
If we value democracy, freedom of the press, and the public's right to know -- American newspapers must publish the cartoons. We must refuse to be intimidated by some Muslims who would prefer the whole world to live in fear and superstition.
If a presidential candidate is accused of having an extramarital affair, and there are incriminating photographs, it is incumbent on the media to publish the images.
Freedom of the press and the public's right to know trumps concern for any embarrassment the pictures may cause the presidential candidate and his family.
In a previous essay I lamented CNN's hypocrisy in failing to publish the cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad. In an online article about the controversy CNN had this disclaimer: "CNN has chosen to not show the cartoons out of respect for Islam."
In a March 27, 2000 article published online by CNN they published an image of Chris Ofili's "The Holy Virgin Mary." The artist used elephant dung and images of female genitalia in that work.
It's not just CNN that has developed a yellow streak. almost all of the American media has refused to publish the cartoons.
The editor of the New York Times should not be obsessed with the reaction of the Muslim world if he publishes the caricatures, he should be more concerned with living up to his paper's ideal of publishing "all the news that's fit to print."
I have seen the cartoons depicting the Prophet Muhammad, and in my opinion they qualify as valid political satire. But most Americans have not seen the cartoons, and we need to see them to understand what the turmoil is all about.
If we value democracy, freedom of the press, and the public's right to know -- American newspapers must publish the cartoons. We must refuse to be intimidated by some Muslims who would prefer the whole world to live in fear and superstition.
Print
Email
