Madison media and Danish cartoons

In an unusual move, Scott Milfred, editorial page editor of the Wisconsin State Journal, ran a column over the weekend explaining why he will not be publishing the controversial Danish cartoons in his newspaper. It is a well-written piece by a man for whom I have great respect.

I cannot help but to feel, however, as though he has made a mistake. While the argument he puts forward would be a logical basis for denying the cartoon should it have been brought to the State Journal, not a Danish publication, in its origin, the piece fails to address the current scenario.

On page 6 of today's Badger Herald, one of the 12 cartoons has been reprinted, accompanied by an 800 word editorial explaining the paper's rationale for doing so. It is a decision the paper's editorial board made after lengthy and thorough debate and it is a decision of which I am immensely proud.

Mr. Milfred, in his column, asserts:

Just last week we pulled a locally-drawn cartoon off this very page because it made some of us queasy -- for reasons the cartoonist never intended.

The cartoon, a goofy twist on a mobster hit, poked fun at the National Rifle Association for its gun lust. An NRA boss ordered Republicans to "take out" the governor in the fall election, not with bullets but with a bag of campaign cash.

On its surface, the cartoon was pointed and funny. Yet we didn't run it because it eerily caused a couple of staffers to recall the assassination of President Kennedy.

We weighed the benefit of making a sharp political point against the specter of unintentionally referencing one of America's darkest hours, and the decision not to run it became obvious.

Again, this interesting analogy seems perhaps more pertinent to the dilemma initially faced by the Danish publication. Here, the question is one of reproduction as a means of both informing the readership and advocating free speech rights. As the Herald editorial board notes:

While the Danish cartoons in question are undoubtedly offensive, regrettable distortions of a predominately peaceful religion and illustrations that run against the teachings of Islam, they are also now the impetus of riots that have caused numerous deaths, reduced symbols of global peace to charred ruins and brought attention to a clearly unstable region of the globe.

As a result, the cartoons in question are clearly newsworthy and it is our firm belief that the media ought not be a gatekeeper guided by prude censorship, but rather a vehicle of facilitation in the grand marketplace of ideas. While one may aptly question the newspapers that originally ran these cartoons, it would seem that the illustrations have now become more than depictions of an unsavory nature and commenced to stand also for the very necessity of free speech.

I have the utmost respect for Mr. Milfred, both as a reader and writer (I have scribed for his page in the past). And I realize this to be one of those tremendous shades of gray in which reasonable people can disagree without either party being per se wrong. I am also glad that in not running these images, the Wisconsin State Journal has furnished an explanation, not merely ignoring the issue at hand.

But I also continue to feel that these are images the media has both a duty and responsibility to share. And that is what The Badger Herald has done today.