Daily Illini Editors Suspended For Publishing Prophet Muhammad Cartoons
Robert Paul Reyes
February 23, 2006
The New York Times, USA Today, The Chicago Tribune, The San Francisco Chronicle, The Washington Post, The Christian Science Monitor, The Wall Street Journal and almost every other newspaper in America practiced self-censorship by failing to publish the cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad.
America is the freest and most democratic country in the world, we cherish our freedom of expression and freedom of the press, but we didn't get the full facts of one of the biggest stories of the year because newspaper editors were too cowardly.
Two editors at the University of Illinois at Urban-Champaign Daily Illini student newspaper attempted to fill this information gap by republishing the Jyllands-Posten Muhammad caricatures.
The 12 cartoons, satirizing the Prophet Muhammad, were first published in a Danish newspaper last fall. They were republished in a few newspapers in Europe, and we are all aware of the insanity that broke out in Muslim outposts all over the world.
The two student editors were suspended for their troubles, ostensibly because they failed to notify the rest of the editorial board before publishing the cartoons.
According to the "Chicago Marron", Acton Gordon, the suspended editor-in-chief of "The Daily Illini", said he decided to print the cartoons because he felt "nobody understood what was going on" without seeing the cause of the uproar.
From the "Chicago Marron": "In an editorial accompanying the cartoons, Gordon wrote that he felt the nationwide refusal to reprint the cartoons was a sign the first amendment was being challenged."
Editors of American newspapers who refused to publish the cartoons, claim they did not want to offend the sensibilities of Muslims. Some of them even went so far as to accuse the very few newspapers that published the cartoons of racism.
Who is being racist, by failing to publish the cartoons because they do not want to "inflame passions", they are basically saying that Muslims will explode in an orgy of violence at the slightest provocation.
While this is demonstrably true of Muslims in most parts of the world, Muslims in America have been exposed to the ideals of democracy and I'm confident that they would not resort to violence to protest publication of the cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad.
I commend the two editors of "The Daily Illini" for their dedication to their craft and for their stout defense of the First Amendment, it's too bad that they are not on the editorial board of "The New York Times" or "The Washington Post".
I don't have any faith in the resolve of the major newspapers, but will any other college newspapers follow the example of the two editors of "The Daily Illini"?
America is the freest and most democratic country in the world, we cherish our freedom of expression and freedom of the press, but we didn't get the full facts of one of the biggest stories of the year because newspaper editors were too cowardly.
Two editors at the University of Illinois at Urban-Champaign Daily Illini student newspaper attempted to fill this information gap by republishing the Jyllands-Posten Muhammad caricatures.
The 12 cartoons, satirizing the Prophet Muhammad, were first published in a Danish newspaper last fall. They were republished in a few newspapers in Europe, and we are all aware of the insanity that broke out in Muslim outposts all over the world.
The two student editors were suspended for their troubles, ostensibly because they failed to notify the rest of the editorial board before publishing the cartoons.
According to the "Chicago Marron", Acton Gordon, the suspended editor-in-chief of "The Daily Illini", said he decided to print the cartoons because he felt "nobody understood what was going on" without seeing the cause of the uproar.
From the "Chicago Marron": "In an editorial accompanying the cartoons, Gordon wrote that he felt the nationwide refusal to reprint the cartoons was a sign the first amendment was being challenged."
Editors of American newspapers who refused to publish the cartoons, claim they did not want to offend the sensibilities of Muslims. Some of them even went so far as to accuse the very few newspapers that published the cartoons of racism.
Who is being racist, by failing to publish the cartoons because they do not want to "inflame passions", they are basically saying that Muslims will explode in an orgy of violence at the slightest provocation.
While this is demonstrably true of Muslims in most parts of the world, Muslims in America have been exposed to the ideals of democracy and I'm confident that they would not resort to violence to protest publication of the cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad.
I commend the two editors of "The Daily Illini" for their dedication to their craft and for their stout defense of the First Amendment, it's too bad that they are not on the editorial board of "The New York Times" or "The Washington Post".
I don't have any faith in the resolve of the major newspapers, but will any other college newspapers follow the example of the two editors of "The Daily Illini"?
Print
Email
