Here’s journalistic principle

Staffers at the New York Press walked out in protest after they were forced to pull the now-infamous Danish Muslim cartoons. Observer report here; NY Post report here. More mentions in blogs than in the big press, which remains spineless.

: Speaking of spines, last night’s Daily Show was wonderful, treating the whole story with appropriate absurdity.

: LATER: In the comments, the King of Philly, Karl Martino, gives you all the links to the Philadelphia Inquirer’s brave publishing of the cartoons and the aftermath.

  • The Philadelphia Inquirer has been all over this and has published one of the most controversial of the cartoons last Saturday. It has been picketed and more protests are planned for Friday.

    “Muslims picket The Inquirer”

    “Inquirer editors explain why they published Danish cartoon”

    “A media dilemma: The rest of a story”

    “Opinion: Inquirer Cartoonist Auth, on cartoon controversy”

    Tony Auth editorial cartoon last Friday:


  • Trogdor

    I’d say these staffers are brave. They’re facing some angry attention from certain reactionaries, and possibly losing their employment. And, that’s not the worst they might face …

    At the same time, though, I believe they — unlike much of the American media it seems — are upholding their journalistic integrity. They’re not letting fear prevent them from reporting, and showing, what’s going on.

    On a side note, I think the under-reported story here is how this became such a grassfire. The European cartoons were printed last fall, so why the sudden backlash? Some radical imams grouped them together, and added their own cartoons (claiming they were also Danish), and then repeatedly put these in front of the masses.

    Talk about mind-control.

    On a similar note, I like how Cox & Forkum (editorial cartoonists) have treated it, as well.

    1/31 – “Image Problem”

    2/5 – “A Right to Blasphemy”

    2/7 – “Western Dhimmitude”

    And I say again, why does CNN fuzzy out the cartoons instead of showing them, when in 1999 the media claimed the crucifixes in elephant crap were free speech? Why’s it okay to offend Christians or Jews, but not Muslims? A little consistency is needed.

  • Thanks for the compliment :)

    There’s more:

    Daniel Rubin has been covering this on his blog:

    “Cool Voices”

    “Take That!”

    “Heard The One About The Holocaust?”

    And Will Bunch at the Daily News has posted:
    “Signe on the cartoon controversy”

    Singe has posted a piece on BeliefNet:

    And also not to be missed,
    Doug Marlette, in 2003, faced similar scrutiny over an editorial carton he authored: “I Was a Tool of Satan”:

    Love this exchange he quoted:

    — One of the many angry readers who called me at the newspaper said, “You’re a tool of Satan.”

    “Excuse me?”

    “You’re a tool of Satan for that cartoon you drew.”

    “That’s impossible,” I said. “I couldn’t be a tool of Satan. The Charlotte Observer’s personnel department tests for that sort of thing.”

    Confused silence on the other end.

    “They try to screen for tools of Satan,” I explained. “Knight Ridder human resources has a strict policy against hiring tools of Satan.”—

  • Pingback: CaNN :: We started it.()

  • HA

    As an Inquirer customer, I’ve been contemplating cancelling my subscription because of their overwhelming and naked left-wing bias. After all, how many Trudy Rubin columns can one man take?

    Here’s the basic template of her columns:

    “I got of the jet in some international hot spot and spoke to the locals. I found out that Bush is an idiot and things we really be better if America just did what the wise locals, Kofi Annan, Jacques Chirac, Jimmy Carter and Trudy Rubin think is right.”

    I’ve the same column a million times. They’re always the same regardless of the topic.

    Anyway, all that aside, I have to respect the Inqy for publishing the Danish cartoons. So I’ve decided to keep my subscription.