Despicable caricatures reflect arrogance - not press freedom

The firestorm of controversy ignited by the caricatures published by the Danish newspaper and fuelled by other European papers that reprinted them is not about freedom of the press. To believe that it is, is to allow irresponsible elements to hijack that democratic value. All who value a democracy that promotes diversity and tolerance should thus condemn the papers.

What the Danish newspaper did was to test Muslims. And when the Islamic world descended upon them to protest the cartoons, they hide behind the blanket of freedom of the press. The violent response from some Muslims, while regrettable, also allows some to say, “See, we told you so, Muslims can only respond through violence.” This is a perverse argument.

When the paper published the cartoons knowing full well that any visual depiction of Prophet Muhammad is regarded as blasphemous, they would have known – or should have known - that it was going to offend Muslims. They should also have known that many Muslims would not take it lying down. They should also have known that not everyone would respond in the same way. That is a given that cuts across other religious followers as well. Some Christians, for instance, have even resorted to extreme violence against abortion clinics and their staff.

Newspapers in France, Norway, Germany, Spain, and Italy that reprinted the cartoons said they were showing solidarity for freedom of the press. No, that is not what they are doing. Instead, they are showing their arrogance. Did they need to reprint the cartoons to show solidarity? They could have easily stated their position and made their case without reprinting them.

Even the freedom of the press that they claim as part of European culture is long characterised by some restrictions that are accepted as proper and necessary. European media have long been known for adopting care and circumspection towards the Holocaust so as not to offend the Jews. French media are even forbidden under the law from advertising Nazi memorabilia.

There are others from within Europe itself who have spoken out against the Danish (and other European) papers. As noted earlier, one of them is Simon Jenkins (of the Times of London) and he even questioned the BBC for showing some of the cartoons in the name of providing context for its broadcasts on the controversy.

Another is Zsofia Szilagyi, a Budapest-based political analyst and director of the Human Rights Film Foundation. His commentary was published in the International Herald Tribune on 3 February.

But when making a point about self-censorship and press freedom, newspapers should have considered the cartoons' potential effects on Europe's growing anti-Islam sentiments. Why make a negative point about Islam in an environment where Islam is already getting extensive negative press through the coverage of hostage-takings, bombings and terrorist groups?

Read full article

Thus, what the Danish (and other European) papers did was not about freedom of the press. Rather, they hijacked the issue based on their despicable arrogance. And governments like many in Asia such as Malaysia should not look at what has happened for justification of (further) governmental regulation of the press in the name of tolerance and peace – for to do so would give perverse validation to these hijackers.