Posted on 02/19/2006 9:05:55 AM PST by Jefflg
By Mike Fancher
Seattle Times executive editor
Why hasn't The Seattle Times published the Danish cartoons that sparked an international crisis?
Readers who have asked that question see it as central to a complicated set of issues involving free expression, religious tolerance and international conflict. Those issues are complicated, but the answer to the central question is simple. We haven't published the cartoons because we believe they would needlessly and deeply offend a portion of our readers. That is the standard we routinely apply to potentially offensive material, asking ourselves whether there it is a compelling journalistic reason to publish.
The standard applies broadly to language, photos and illustrations. For example, our policy on the use of potentially offensive language says, in part: "The Seattle Times recognizes that racial, ethnic, religious and other slurs are very hurtful to many readers, so we use them in the newspaper only when they are absolutely essential to the reader's understanding.
"In the same vein, this is a family newspaper, and we want to encourage parents to read it with their children, not to have to hide it from them. Difficult subjects are unavoidable in news coverage, but profane and vulgar language almost always is avoidable. Therefore, we apply the same standard as we do with slurs: the language must be absolutely necessary to the reader's understanding."
Images can have even greater impact than words. In the case of highly offensive photographs and images, we use them only in a case where a written description would not suffice for readers' understanding of an important story.
The spirit behind this approach is that most of the time there are thoughtful, sensitive ways to inform readers. Because we respect readers, we are obligated to thoroughly explore those alternatives.
In the case of the Danish cartoons, some readers have said they don't understand the outrage that has led to embassy burnings, death threats and the killing of some protesters. They wonder whether their understanding would be enhanced by seeing the images, but that is doubtful.
"Why would a reader expect to be able to make a ruling on whether the cartoons are offensive if he or she is not Muslim?" asked David Birdwell, Times nation / world editor. "That's the whole point of the story: Muslims see them as blasphemous; others don't."
The essence of the cartoons is easily described in words. They depict the Prophet Muhammad in various ways, including one with a bomb-shaped turban with a lighted fuse. The issue for Muslims isn't just how he is portrayed but that he is portrayed at all.
So our coverage has explored why Muslims generally abhor any depiction of the prophet, as well as the international context in which outrage has become violent.
We've done this extensively in the pages of The Times, and even more so at seattletimes.com.
Some readers have argued that not publishing the images amounts to censorship and a failure to defend press freedom. We don't see it that way. Press freedom means we have the right to publish or not publish based on our judgment of what serves readers.
Birdwell said: "We can run anything we want to, but we have a responsibility to be sensitive to people. Freedom of the press isn't about just running anything you want."
Other readers wonder if we are intimidated by the outraged reactions elsewhere. "That has nothing to do with it in my mind," Birdwell said. "I just don't understand the point of intentionally offending a portion of our readers."
For readers who want to see the images, our Web site offers a link to a reproduction of the original Danish newspaper page. Enabling you to take the step to see them if you choose is far different from bringing them into your home in the pages of your newspaper.
We don't expect that every reader will agree with every decision we make, but we do hope readers see our news judgment as thoughtful and respectful. mfancher@seattletimes.com
Inside The Times appears in the Sunday Seattle Times. If you have a comment on news coverage, write to Michael R. Fancher, P.O. Box 70, Seattle, WA 98111, call 206-464-3310 or send e-mail to seattletimes.com">mfancher@seattletimes.com. More columns at www.seattletimes.com/columnists
Copyright © 2006 The Seattle Times Company
This garbage posing as ‘art’ was deemed offensive to Christians. CNN had no qualms about showing it and offending Christians. It has remained on their web site until today. Nearly five years now.
In fact, if you click on the link above, you will see this ‘work’ - still proudly displayed on CNN’s website.
Now the violent Muslims are rampaging and burning things - again - about a few cartoons, and CNN says, “CNN has chosen to not show the cartoons out of respect for Islam.”
http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/asiapcf/02/05/cartoon.protests/index.html
Follow this link and read the last line in the article.
The New York Times ran the same photo about a week ago. In print and on the web.
Hypocrisy?
Do not trust the MSM.
Though I bet the editiors have no problem with reporting things which hurt Christian or conservative readers.
What will happen is that which has happened before - the Times will depend up its political opponents to protect it and curse them safely for having done so.
Agreed!
But when threats and intimidation become the norm from muslims, the liberal MSM responds with 'appeasement and total capitulation' expected from 'COWERING SHEEP'!
Thoughtful and respectable my foot! Cowardly and boot licking is more like it!
If I were a terrorizing, bomb-making Islamofascist, I'd definitely move to some pansy town like Seattle to practice my trade, what with a limp newspaper like this being published there.
Does this qualify?
There may have been earlier ones published by the paper, but I refuse to register to find out.
They are here.
Seattle / King county not only wants them but will feed house and give them time to worship 3-4 times a day (port of Seattle Airport). When you look into the bowels of the DNC here is where you find Seattle and the Seattle times. If people think DC is corrupt they should never look into seattle.
Simple cowardice, mixed with a liberal dose of hatred for Bush. The Seattle Times bleats about freedom of the press, yet has zero backbone when they have a chance to confront real tyranny that operates with violence.
If the Seattle Times were a movie character, they would be Eddie Albert in "Attack!"
Oh, They have done so with glee.
This editorial shows how far off they are from the rest of the public.
Hi Mike
Your answer to the question Why hasn't The Seattle Times published the Danish cartoons that sparked an international crisis? Was in part as follows.
We haven't published the cartoons because we believe they would needlessly and deeply offend a portion of our readers. That is the standard we routinely apply to potentially offensive material, asking ourselves whether there it is a compelling journalistic reason to publish.
Images can have even greater impact than words. In the case of highly offensive photographs and images, we use them only in a case where a written description would not suffice for readers' understanding of an important story.
"The Seattle Times recognizes that racial, ethnic, religious and other slurs are very hurtful to many readers, so we use them in the newspaper only when they are absolutely essential to the reader's understanding.
Tom here- Your reasons for avoiding printing the cartoons are so transparently false, I couldn't resist writing to you.
You certainly didn't have any trouble printing, for weeks, the Abu Ghraib prison photos to further your anti war stand, and to undermine our military in Iraq, even though it was explained the miscreants were going to be put on trial for the abuse. Something the Army had started doing months before the photos became available.
You also knew that publishing those photos would put our soldiers in danger of a Muslim backlash, and it did just that. Sensitivity and getting our soldiers in more danger wasn't an issue for you.
That was a safe thing to do for you, because the riled up Muslims would take it out on our military in Iraq, and you could demoralize other Americans.
Your anti war, anti Bush, anti Republican agenda is not exactly a hidden one. Endangering our soldiers is another matter. You low life scum.
But the Mohammed cartoons are a different story . They will rile up the Muslims, just like the Abu Ghraib photos, but the big difference is besides endangering our military on the battlefield, it is going to get newspaper people killed. People who are easier to find on the streets of the world. They have names and addresses and usually aren't carrying guns to defend themselves.
That's why you didn't print them . You don't want a local Seattle Muslim murdering you, or a member of your family. That's understandable, but don't give me another excuse, by leaving the Muslims off the hook.
The Muslim pressure in on newspaper people now. (An Indian state minister has offered a reward of more than $10 million and a prospective killer's weight in gold to anyone who beheads one of the cartoonists who angered Muslims by depicting the Prophet Mohammed in a Danish newspaper, the London Sunday Times reported this week. The offer follows a Pakistani cleric's reward of $1 million and a car for the killing of one of the cartoonists. ) Not to mention, the Muslim clerics screaming for revenge killings of the newspaper people.
Don't give me the crap about not wanting to needlessly and deeply offend a portion of your readers; or only showing offensive photos, where a written description would not suffice for readers' understanding of an important story. You sure didn't feel that way about Abu Ghraib photos.
Infidel Embassies around the world are being attacked by Muslims over the Danish press cartoons,and other countries who reprinted them, and people are being killed. . This will terrorize newspaper people into avoiding any criticisms of Muslims.
If you had not printed the Abu Graib photos in the past; you might have a case.
The bottom line is printing the Muhammad cartoons doesn't fit your agenda. But printing Abu Graib pictures does, by putting more pressure on our military. And you are printing a new batch of Abu Graib photos as I write this, but not a Mohammed cartoon, so Americans can see what the fuss and killings around the world are all about.
For printing the Abu Graib photos and not printing the Mohammed cartoons , you are a sorry excuse as an American and a newspaper person. - tom
I sent mike:
"An American Expat in Southeast Asia"
He e-mailed back saying "I wondered why I was getting a new round of criticism today, most of it pretty ugly. May I ask where you found this."
LOL Ugly? He doesn’t read the times!
I'm not going to tell him where this started, as he's the Seattle Times executive editor. I always known these guys don't report they just copy and paste let him do some investigating for once.
A wonderful informative read. Even if you aren't interested in investments/stock market/commodities, etc.. ......
Can't tell you how many times I've clipped out articles for my kids to read.
I wish that were true, but it's not. Europe has cravenly turned its back on the Danes, too. Very few newspapers have run the cartoons. I saw a photo from France's biggest supermarket chain showing a sign on an empty shelf saying they wouldn't stock Danish dairy products out of respect. Burlesconi has just fired one of his ministers for making up t-shirts from the cartoons. Not a single mainstream paper in Britain has run them. It goes on and on.
It's totally insane.
It’s easy to be tough about nothing. The press corps that noisily champions “the public’s right to know” about a minor hunting accident simultaneously assures the public that they’ve no need to see these Danish cartoons that have caused riots, arson and death around the world. On CNN, out of “sensitivity” to Islam, they show the cartoons but with the Prophet’s face pixilated so that he looks as if Cheney’s ventilated him with birdshot and it turned puffy and gangrenous. C’mon, guys, these are interesting times. Anyone can unload the umpteenth round of blanks into the bulletproof Chimpy Hallibushitler, but why not take a shot at something that matters?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.