Old Media To Readers And Viewers: Get Your Information Elsewhere.

The Mohammed cartoon controversy has revealed that the internet can be a better source of news than old media. Anyone interested in this subject knows that to see what the fuss is all about you have to go the internet to find the images. Most media in the United States have chosen not to publish the cartoons. The editor of the San Diego Union-Tribune gave this explanation in her paper today. (Here.)

"Karin Winner, editor of The San Diego Union-Tribune, said, 'The issue of the cartoons brings into focus one of the most difficult decisions that editors have to make. Is our primary responsibility to print everything, regardless of who may be offended, or to show restraint and invite criticism from those who would accuse us of hiding the truth?'

She added, 'Right now, my concern for our Muslim community overrides the news value of publishing any of the cartoons. The cartoons have been well-described in these pages over the past few days.'"

Granted the images have been "well-described." But there's an old saying that a picture is worth a thousand words.

It's not possible to understand what the fuss is all about without viewing images. For instance, not all the cartoons are offensive. Those that are offensive are no more offensive to Mister Americano's eye than many political cartoons published in newspapers every day. Others may disagree. But how can anybody make a decision on that without seeing the images? Describing the cartoons without showing them deprives readers of the opportunity to decide for themselves the relative offensiveness of the images.

American media who have decided to privilege sensitivity over publication of the images, have all but told their readers and viewers to go somewhere else for the information they need. So, if you haven't already, follow this link and see for yourself what the fuss is all about.

-tdr

Technorati: cartoons, Islam, media