| Hear, hear! Do you have a newspaper press, a blog, a dot-matrix printer, an etch-a-sketch or a broken piece of sidewalk chalk? Anyone who has any kind of publishing device is morally obligated to reproduce the controversial cartoons depicting the prophet Muhammad. This by decree of Alberta’s usual loud-mouthed fundamentalists, who argue that if we don’t choose to further inflame an already deadly situation, we will be surrendering to evil Muslim extremists (also known as "terrorists," "evildoers" or, more simply, "them").
Counter extremism with extremism, hate with hate, idiocy with idiocy. That is the way to respond, as demonstrated so perfectly this past week by Ezra Levant, publisher of the Western Standard. Canada’s more moderate media outlets – that is, every media outlet except for a handful – have declined to publish the cartoons that have sparked riots and deaths in the Middle East. Obviously, these publishers are cowards. Not the Western Standard. Not Ezra Levant. His magazine published the cartoons with what he calls "courage."
"Not a day goes by when the mainstream media doesn’t offend the religious sensibilities of religious Christians, Jews or others," Levant wrote in his newspaper column published the same day the cartoons were printed in the magazine.
Well, that’s right. We have all been wronged in some way by the media, so it only makes sense to wrong others in return. If you are a Christian, jettison all that stuff Jesus said about turning the other cheek and instead retaliate. If you are a Jew, forget that whole "vengeance is mine" thing that God said and make revenge your own business. If you are not a religious person, you’d best find some kind of fanatic sect that can give you justification for antagonizing people who are different than you. Being moderate and tolerant is so last week. Fundamentalism is the new chic.
How the hate spreads. One man who posted a comment on the Western Standard blog applauding the magazine’s decision to publish the cartoons, wrote: "I have been and will continue to display these cartoons in my store for my customers to see. I will not be held hostage by these animals in my own country. Muslims have now started a backlash in the west by their response to these cartoons. The gloves are now off, a lot of Canadians have had enough of their anger and vial (sic) retort against us. If they want a fight bring it on."
Yes, bring it on. It’s the whole "clash of civilizations" approach where we are expected to demonize the other because we will never understand him. Presumably it’s better to offend than to seek to understand. Better to make war than peace.
The Western Standard certainly has declared open war on their usual targets in all of this: the CBC, Islam, "liberal media," decent people with common sense, that kind of thing. According to Levant, the editors who have chosen not to run the cartoons – especially at the CBC – should be explaining to their readers and viewers why they haven’t done so. It’s a strange request, since most of us understand quite clearly why the majority of Canadian media outlets haven’t reprinted the cartoons.
But Levant is playing the showman. He’s bragging about his "courage" while swinging wildly at those who criticize his decision to publish the cartoons. Meanwhile, he insists that he has nothing to defend because he’s done nothing wrong. "We’re not abnormal for printing the cartoons," he wrote. "Canada’s other publications and TV stations are the abnormal ones for avoiding the subject at the centre of the largest story of the week."
Well, that’s just silly. My Oxford dictionary defines "abnormal" as "deviating from the norm; exceptional." Which makes Levant and his magazine, um, abnormal. In this case it also makes them tasteless.
The arguments for publishing the cartoons are weak at best and spiteful at worst. Levant and other self-proclaimed free speech crusaders say that if the cartoons aren’t republished again and again, regardless of the consequences, we’ll be giving radical Muslim extremists some kind of power over us. Of course, it doesn’t mean that at all. It just means that most editors have good heads on their shoulders and understand that a free press ought to be responsible to the society it serves. For that we can be thankful.
Publishing images with the full knowledge that they could exacerbate conflict and cause harm to people is simply irresponsible journalism. It adds no insight or depth into the story, as good journalism is supposed to do, despite Levant’s claims to the contrary. It doesn’t show courage, but immaturity and a lack of discernment. Hardly something to be bragging about. |
Copyright ©2006 FFWD. All rights reserved.