To print or not to print?

In the wake of the Jyllands-Posten cartoon controversy, the Strand weighs in on freedom of speech and press in the student media.

Aine O'Hare

All media, student or otherwise, has a responsibility to its audience. Media should inform, invoke discussion, represent a wide range of ideas and encourage critical thinking. Granted, when student media is concerned, this role often takes a very tongue-in-cheek tone as it seeks to both appeal to and represent its demographic. The undergraduate experience is the universally-accepted time to find one's self, and for reasons yet to be documented, articles about thefacebook.com and funny headlines seem to help the process.

That being said, there are times when, in attempting to sort out their own priorities and personal opinions, the staff of student newspapers underestimate their influence. Student newspapers are in a perfect position to push the envelope since factors like media convergence don't come into play, nor do investors or advertisers. The wrath of the Dean's office and of various student groups, while forces to be reckoned with, seem much more manageable than that of CanWest Global.

However, you can only push an envelope so far before you get a nasty paper cut, one sure to be infected with the gangrene of social unrest.

Almost every newspaper on stands today has been following the controversy of the publication of the Mohammed cartoons in the Danish newspaper, Jyllands-Posten. Certain student newspapers got even more heavily involved when they decided to not only cover the controversy, but print the cartoons themselves. The Cadre, UPEI's campus newspaper, found its issues yanked from stands when protests ensued after reprinting said comics. Ray Keating, the Cadre's editor-in-chief, argued that it was a stand for freedom of the press. So the Cadre was merely fulfilling its responsibilities as a free media outlet, even if it was at the risk of being a mainstage attraction in a media circus.

But was it really freedom of the press, or a case of media martyrdom? Publishing these cartoons seems to do little more than fan the flames of already-existing controversy. Is it the press's responsibility to decide what people should absorb, or is providing an option more important? Articles are somewhat different; you can decide whether or not to read something based on the headline - which, admittedly, is questionable on the subject of giving audiences agency. A graphic or photograph, however, is much more intense: you don't really have the choice to view it or not.

The Strand found itself as a potential guest star on the Danish Cartoon Show. It started when we were sent a cartoon that the Varsity refused to print. The image, showing two people that looked surprisingly like the prophets Jesus and Mohammed making out, wasn't a particularly funny cartoon, but in the wake of the Jyllands-Posten fiasco none of us really wanted to touch it. Then we were faced with an even bigger dilemma: to reprint or not to reprint the Danish cartoons themselves, the ones that got the Cadre in so much trouble and have incited violence overseas.

To some degree, we felt like it was our duty to do so. We would be making a statement: that freedom of expression triumphs over all, that tactics like the administration emptying newsstands over publication of controversial subjects are Draconian and detrimental to an environment like a university, which claims to nurture new ideas and inspire independent thinking. After all, freedom of speech and freedom of the press are basic values in Canadian society. But where does freedom of images fit in?

Our own editorial staff was completely conflicted on the issue. Many of them had had their fill of cartoon-related debate with the prophets-making-out-cartoon and didn't even reply to the e-mails that were sent out. By Monday night, not everyone's opinion had been aired, and the notorious cartoons were screaming for a decision to be made.

We won't be like other institutions. We will value the freedom to choose just as highly as that to express. And above all, we will try to the best of our abilities to reach out to the greatest possible audience we can, hopefully inspiring some discussion and critical thinking along the way.

You can see the cartoon we almost didn't publish below. In light of everything else, it seems pretty damn tame. Hell, those could be any two guys kissing! And who doesn't play tonsil hockey in the Tunnel of Love? As for the other ones, you can view them online, but only if you want to.

 

The Strand, February 16, 2006