Publish or Not? Muhammad Cartoons Still Vexing U.S. Editors (Dinosaur Media Psychoneurotic Alert)

Editor & Publisher ^ | Feb 8, 2006 | Staff

[VOA]

bump

[R.W.Ratikal]

Newspaper editors need not worry about the cartoons that have upset Muslims. It's yesterday's news now. Muslims are not a factor in the modern world so whatever offends them is not important.

However when they break a civil law in protest over an imagined insult they should go to jail.

[AmericanChef]

-"It's not censorship, self or otherwise," said Deputy World Editor Jim Michaels.-

Here's the definition of censorship: Prevention of disturbing or painful thoughts or feelings from reaching consciousness except in a disguised form.

Again, as always, lefties are using words inappropriately.

[Wasanother]

They ALL must show the cartoons on the same morning on the front pages! It's the news and that's why they're called "newspapers". DO IT CHICKEN LIVERS!!!

[ArmyTeach]

Also, making the decision not to print or cover specific items or issues is indeed a form of propaganda, in this case favoring Muslims.

[TravisBickle]

I actually agree with Eric Mink, that it is NOT censorship, but editorial judgement. However, it is a judgement made of fear, not of any concern about being offensive. For example, if the cartoon depicted Jesus in the same fashion, would the Post-Dispatch make the same decision?

[dynachrome]

The Rocky Mountain News in Denver, Colorado, published one of the cartoons yesterday on the editorial page. Large size. (It was the "stop, stop we have run out of virgins" one)

[Cindy_Cin]

Excellent point~! I had forgotten how much crap the "media" gave those private businessmen about not showing Mike Moore's slander film! Which by the way is now used by Al Queda (spelling?) as a propaganda tool~
Thanks again to the American left

[Cindy_Cin]

Exactly
Just more exposure of the complete 2 faced justifications of our "enlightened, sensitive" media hacks!

[Cindy_Cin]

You can almost smell the RAT in Democrat~ media

[penelopesire]

"Also, making the decision not to print or cover specific items or issues is indeed a form of propaganda, in this case favoring Muslims."

They sure are not afraid of stirring up the cauldron of irrational Islamic hate,are they?! They published all of the Abu Graib stuff and made up other stuff to INFLAME THE ARAB world! I think they are just too afraid of that rage being directed at them! COWARDS..the lot of them.

[penelopesire]

It is the press's fears that are censoring them. It has nothing to do with 'editorial judgement'...unless of course what they mean by that it is in their best interest and 'judgement' not to have their heads lopped off by an enraged barbarious Islamist! And you betcha, if this cartoon had been making fun of Christ...every LSM outlet in the country would have run it!

[Cindy_Cin]

I was angry enough about the media hypocrisy, but when the Abu Gharib comparison was made, it really drove the point home....!@#$%^&*()_!@#$%^&*(
Media Scum!

[Alouette]

New York Times Executive Editor Bill Keller said that he and his staff concluded after a "long and vigorous debate" that publishing the cartoon would be "perceived as a particularly deliberate insult" by Muslims.

So they dug into their archives and illustrated an article about the Moslem "cartoon rage" with Virgin Mary made out of elephant dung.

[dighton]

If they publish the pictures, there is the possibility that enraged muslims may be inspired to target and kill journalists, so they won't do it.

When they published the Abu Gharib pictures, there was the possibility that enraged muslims might be inspired to target and kill US soldiers, so they published them as soon and as often as they could.

Very harsh and quite correct.

[colorado tanker]

These MSM cowards are even more spineless than the French.

[cwb]

---

Our media is a joke. These people aren't just hypocrites...they are provocateurs. While they won't publish these cartoons for fear of further offending Muslims, they had none of these same concerns when they not only published the photos of Abu Graib for months on end...but sued for the release of more to be published, even after knowing the anger it fed.

Just like the flushing-Koran story, the media knew damn well that this would inflame Muslim emotions; of course, "those" angry emotions would be aimed at Bush and the military, unlike the cartoons, where the media would take the brunt of the criticism for daring to publish them. These people have no problem endangering the lives of those fighting for us...but Heaven forbid that anger be turned towards them were they might be threatened.

And you simply can't dismiss the media's silence on this...because they know that further outbursts of violence, especially in this country if they print these cartoons, would damage any sympathy they have garnered against Bush and the WOT. The media just can't afford to have Muslims looking bad if it in any way helps the Bush Administration.

[knews_hound]

Bloggers, doing the heavy lifting for the MS since 2002 ©

To see the cartoons, mash here.

Cheers,

knewshound

[muawiyah]

The WarshPost (the local rag) has its main printing plant down the street from here. It's within walking distance of 5 mosques ~ hear that, FIVE MOSQUES!!!!!

They didn't publish the cartoons.