NYTimes Publishes Offensive Picture of Pope After Censoring Muhammad Cartoon
Tuesday, 30 Jun 2015 04:38 PM
The New York Times refused to publish cartoons depicting Muhammad, the founder of Islam, after the Charlie Hebdo killings in January, but did publish a picture of Pope Benedict XVI made of condoms, Mediaite reports.
"Under Times standards, we do not normally publish images or other material deliberately intended to offend religious sensibilities," the Times said of its refusal to print the Muhammad cartoons. "After careful consideration, Times editors decided that describing the cartoons in question would give readers sufficient information to understand today's story."
But the Times clearly didn't follow its own standards on Monday when it published a photograph of the picture of Benedict, which is currently on display at Milwaukee Art Museum, Mediaite's Alex Griswold says.
"Make no mistake, the portrait was 'deliberately intended to offend religious sensibilities,' at least to the same extent that Charlie Hebdo 'intended to offend,'" Griswold wrote. The Times easily could have described the picture and told the story, he said.
"There’s simply no way to reconcile the publication of the Pope portrait with the Times statement back in January," he added.
The clear reasoning for the discrepancy, Griswold said, is that extremist Muslims threaten to kill anyone who depicts Muhammad because it is considered sacrilegious. Christians are more likely to simply complain.
"The anti-Catholic art display was republished because the Archbishop of Milwaukee’s response was, 'Love your enemies, do good to those who might harm you, said Jesus. In the face of ridicule, we’ll continue to do our best to LOVE ONE ANOTHER.' The Charlie Hebdo images of Muhammad were not republished because the response from the offended parties was mass murder," Griswold said.
© 2015 Newsmax. All rights reserved."Under Times standards, we do not normally publish images or other material deliberately intended to offend religious sensibilities," the Times said of its refusal to print the Muhammad cartoons. "After careful consideration, Times editors decided that describing the cartoons in question would give readers sufficient information to understand today's story."
"Make no mistake, the portrait was 'deliberately intended to offend religious sensibilities,' at least to the same extent that Charlie Hebdo 'intended to offend,'" Griswold wrote. The Times easily could have described the picture and told the story, he said.
Latest News Update
The clear reasoning for the discrepancy, Griswold said, is that extremist Muslims threaten to kill anyone who depicts Muhammad because it is considered sacrilegious. Christians are more likely to simply complain.
"The anti-Catholic art display was republished because the Archbishop of Milwaukee’s response was, 'Love your enemies, do good to those who might harm you, said Jesus. In the face of ridicule, we’ll continue to do our best to LOVE ONE ANOTHER.' The Charlie Hebdo images of Muhammad were not republished because the response from the offended parties was mass murder," Griswold said.
Stories:
No comments:
Post a Comment
Thanks for commenting. Your comments are needed for helping to improve the discussion.