Would You Reprint Charlie Hebdo’s Cartoons?
January 13, 2015
Ever since the attack on Charlie Hebdo last week I’ve been wondering what I would have done if I were still an editor at a newspaper.
The day after the attack, I was consumed with embarrassment for my profession when so few papers, who reported the murders, printed any of the offending cartoons.
As part of their coverage some publications in Europe did print a cartoon, but except for the Washington Post, I’m not aware of any major US publications who printed an example.
Even the Post printed the cartoon on the editorial page leaving the news columns free to describe the artwork. They, like the New York Times and other publications, claimed the actual drawing ‘were not relevant’ and their message could be communicated in words.
Clearly the cartoons were relevant, and just as clearly, mere words could not describe why the cartoons led to the attack. In truth, after looking at a sampling of the cartoons, I found many childish, insulting and tasteless, but I would still defend their right to publish them.
Almost every religion came under attack, but according to some, only the Muslim faith specifically prohibits depictions of their prophet.
My outrage, was tempered by a good friend, recently ‘retired’ from a small local publication, who noted that if had been editor, he’s not sure if, as a married father, he could take the risk of publication, even in a small hometown weekly.
Would the emotions of any editor be any different. Presumably they could all be the mothers or fathers of young children, and publication would open them up to the same fate as Charlie Hebdo’s cartoonists.
I guess my anger was more rooted in the excuse that the cartoons “were not relevant” to the story. I just wish the editors would admit they were scared and, while they knew that failure to publish meant the jihadists had won, they would be honest about it.
I had the same thought this week when the new cover of Charlie Hebdo was released and the announcement in my email, only showed half the drawing.
I still don’t know what I would have done, were I still the editor of a newspaper or even if I should use a cartoon to illustrate this blog post?
But I hope I would at least be honest with my readers.
Maybe, if somehow everyone published the cartoons, there would be strength in numbers like the 1 million French citizens who marched in defiant solidarity in Paris last weekend.
So, Why Does the World Exist?
May 10, 2013
I admit that I started reading Jim Holt’s “Why Does the World Exist?” as penance. Many years ago, Douglas Sturm, my political theory seminar leader at Bucknell University, tried to introduce me to Plato.
Seems I never had time for the deep thinking required and I almost flunked.
So when I saw Mr. Holt’s book on several 10-best lists last year, I decided to get it another try, for Professor Sturm.
I guess it took 43 years before my brain could wrap itself around the concepts but I’m glad Mr. Holt succeeded.
I would recommend this book for anyone who wants to spend some time contemplating our world’s oldest question, but particularly journalists who get caught up in the daily routine of facts, figures and political hyperbole.
Holt’s writing is erudite, easy to read and understand but filled with concepts that most of us never consider, or try to avoid.
At the same time, like any good journalist, he examines the question posed in his title from every conceivable angle. No just as a personal essay, but by interviewing leaders in the field and then explaining what they seem to be saying.
Others have called his book a “detective story” but, like his readers, who want concrete answers, he accepts or rejects various arguments along the way. He reaches his own conclusions, which we are free to accept, or not, and manages to humanize the whole effort with references to his own life and his experience with death.
The journey is interesting, entertaining and, if Professor Sturm is reading this, enlightening. I’m finally starting to understand some of what Plato was telling us. Thanks for whetting my appetite.
An Era Ends Here
August 2, 2011
After 62 years, a daily newspaper will no longer be delivered to my house. This is a big deal for me and for the newspaper industry.
As someone who grew up with the Haverhill Gazette and The Boston Globe and then spent 30 years in the business, giving in to digital dominance was like saying good-bye to an old friend.
My dad, who will be 91 in a few weeks, beat me to the punch. When his poor eyesight forced him to give up reading a few years ago the newspaper was a casualty as well. For him the iPad was a savior and he now reads four papers a day because he can make the print as large as he wants.
For the newspaper industry, losing a reader like me is a sure sign that they have lost a major battle. If someone from a generation like mine gives up, I guess it’s a foregone conclusion that the newspaper printing business is pretty much over.
I guess I’m the last to admit it.
My wife asked what it will mean. I’m hopeful that reporting and publishing news online will remain strong. In an age of Twitter, Facebook and Google+, legitimate news sites where editors actually make judgements about what is news, are needed. These sites will, hopefully, continue to set the agenda that reasoned consumers need.
Our political climate, including the soon-to-be concluded debt ceiling debate, is largely a product of the unedited, extremist debate that takes over when no-one is in charge.
I could go on about the reason this has happened. The newspaper publishers have no-one to blame but themselves. Their unwillingness to change on a wide range of issues has led to their own demise.
Thankfully, news is still alive. Weekly and small daily publications seem to be thriving. The kind of information that has always been important – the stuff that makes the front of the refrigerator – is still in demand.
I will continue to consume news online, so I guess the final chapter is a long way off, but my small step is still painful.
Arianna and Patch.com
February 7, 2011
I’m a big fan of Patch.com and their local news gathering operation – even if they are owned by AOL. It was interesting to hear Arianna Huffington being interviewed today about the puchase of her Huffington Post site by the AOL content empire (at least in their own eyes).
The only AOL division she chose to name while answering question on The PBS Newshour was Patch.com. I’m not sure if it was a random thought, or if I should be nervous that Ms Huffington will start monkeying around with what has become a pretty successful formula for local news gathering.
AOL and Arianna had conference calls with all the AOL properties which will be under her control but singling out Patch.com would make me a bit nervous if I was one of their local editors. I’m not the only one expressing concern.
Only time will tell, but I really hope I don’t wind up reading local news as dictated by the folks in Washintgton D.C.
Journalism-Back to Basics
January 31, 2011
I’ve been thinking a lot about where journalism is headed and I think I found the answer this week. Meet Emilie Raguso, the Albany, CA editor of Patch.com.
Emilie Raguso
Patch.com is a collection of web-only news websites which is trying to focus on the kind of hyper-local news-gathering that has been the staple of community newspapers for the last 200 years. Give people news about what’s going on in their schools, little league and community and they will actually support your product.
I’m proud to say that I’ve worked for a number of newspapers which were based on this remarkable theory and I know it works. Patch.com, which is owned by AOL, is just doing it without a printing press. You can read the New York Times take on the process but don’t be thrown off by the “looking-down their noses” attitude of the piece. The Times, like other large metros and many journalists, just can’t seem to grasp that people care more about what’s going on in their community than they do about the rest of the world.
I’ve been following the Albany Patch.com site with some interest, even though it doesn’t cover the town where I live. I happened to meet Emilee at a local coffee shop.
I have to admit that I had lost faith that journalism would ever be the same with the internet, but as Emilie sat down – camera draped around her neck – and began talking about all the stories she was trying to cover and how much fun she was having, my hope was renewed.Her dedication to trying to cover meetings, plus doing features and working with freelancers, and being unbiased and getting reaction from the community was refreshing.
She’s only been on the job here for six months, but as we sat at a table outside the small restaurant, we overheard two women talking about a recent Patch.com article, a man walked by with a Patch.com tote bag and several folks stopped by to say hi. That is community journalism.
Maybe we are not all doomed to getting our news from left or right leaning blogs and there is still a place for the kind of journalism I was taught – way back when.
Let’s hope so. And I hope that there’s a Patch.com site that c0vers your community. With any luck the folks at AOL won’t screw things up by trying to control each site from a central location. Only time will tell, but at least they’re off to a good start with Emilie.