This column originally ran Feb. 7, 2006, and remains timely in light of events in France.
Protests in the Muslim world over editorial cartoons published in some European newspapers remind us of two things: that freedom of expression is a precious thing in a free society, and that editorial cartoons still have great power.
The story thus far: Back in September, a Danish newspaper published some caricatures of the Prophet Muhammad. One caricature showed him wearing a turban shaped like a bomb. Some Muslims protested. Strongly. Then several other European and Middle Eastern newspapers republished the caricatures, and things got really wild.
Not a good time to be a Dane in Gaza. Tough time to be a Danish flag. Bad time to be the editor of a French newspaper that republished the caricatures. He forgot to remember who owned the newspaper--an Egyptian. So much for that job.
Who would have thought that "Death to Denmark" would have been right up there on the jihadist hit parade, along with the old standby, "Death to America"?
What to make of this? We have it pretty good in America, where freedom of speech and press and expression is concerned. It would be possible in this robust marketplace of ideas to find both serious and profane criticism of any religion. But there aren't a whole lot of death chants in the streets.
The First Amendment is a safety valve. People can print or say or broadcast an incredibly wide range of opinion, and countering opinions blossom like the roses of spring.
The responsible citizen may then choose the rose that smells sweetest.
Editorial cartooning has a long and glorious history in America, starting with Thomas Nast of New York, who lambasted and caricatured the Tammany Hall political machine at every turn in the 1870s.
Nast used his cartoons in Harper's Weekly to crusade against William M. Tweed--"Boss" Tweed--the city's notorious political kingpin whose organization was known as the Tweed Ring. Nast also popularized the elephant and donkey as symbols of the Republican and Democratic parties.
Tweed was eventually turned out of power and imprisoned. He is widely quoted as having said this about Nast's cartoons: "I don't give a straw for your newspaper articles--my constituents don't know how to read. But they can't help seeing them damn pictures."
The American tradition of powerful and persuasive editorial cartooning is long and rich: Paul Conrad, Jules Feiffer, Bill Mauldin, Herblock, Pat Oliphant, Jeff MacNelly. Arkansas has been graced with the work of Bill Graham, George Fisher, Jon Kennedy and John Deering, our current title holder and undefeated heavyweight champ of editorial cartooning.
How to judge the power of an editorial cartoon? Deering might say by the number of affectionate phone calls. Or, more likely, angry phone calls. To my knowledge, no one has burned him in effigy.
Journalism scholar Kenneth Rystrom says factors by which to judge the effectiveness of an editorial cartoon include "the artistic ability of the artist, the clarity of the message, the political atmosphere at the time of publication and the receptivity of the audience."
Or the burning hostility of the audience, as shown by the case of the unfortunate, and no doubt melancholy, Danes.
Footnote: Editorial cartoonists do not have unlimited freedom. Their work, and the work of everyone else at this newspaper, is subject to review before publication. We call this editing, and it's a difficult concept for some readers to grasp.
Everything, everything, everything--did I leave anything out?--that is published here must meet standards of accuracy, taste, fairness and decorum. That includes the funnies, to the astonishment of the occasional reader. Any comic that crosses the line of good taste may be edited or deleted by our editors.
Why? Because the publisher hires us to edit. It is our duty.
------------v------------
Frank Fellone is the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette's deputy editor.
Editorial on 01/12/2015