I’ve been debating about whether I really wanted to post this all morning. Heidi gave me the heads up about the New York Post cartoon that was printed in today’s paper and posted on their site. Frankly, I was appalled that such a violent and racist piece could be considered funny. I know it’s not the first time. I know past political figures have been the subject of ridicule and this time will be no different. But this just left a bad taste in my mouth.Why is there a need for “art” like this? To raise controversy? To spark anger, talks, questions? For attention?
I know about freedom of the press. I know about freedom of speech. But those freedoms come with responsibilities. Why use that freedom to spew more hatred into the world? With all there is to say and all the words available to say them, why choose the ones that will cause hurt, fire up the ignorant and slow down progress? I don’t understand why ten steps forward must be accompanied by five steps back.
As a member of the press, I don't think censorship is necessarily the answer. But personally, I don't think I could sleep at night knowing something I created did nothing to improve our world. I want better for the future not worse or even the same. Maybe that's just me.
What do you think? Are people reading too much into the cartoon? Or is this clearly racism? Should artists and writers be able to express themselves freely regardless of their message as long as it doesn't cause immediate violence?
UPDATE: The Post apologizes, but still defends, its cartoon.
UPDATE: Six days later, New York Post Chairman Rupert Murdoch personally apologizes.
Image: nypost.com