The New York Times has apologized for its international print edition publishing a cartoon that conveys "anti-Semitic tropes."
These tropes -- metaphors -- are dangerous, the newspaper said, and should never have been published.
The cartoon, published Thursday, portrays a blind President Trump, wearing a skullcap, being led by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel, drawn as a dog on a leash with a Star of David collar.
“The image was offensive, and it was an error of judgment to publish it,” The New York Times said in an editors’ note that will be published in Monday’s international edition.
Eileen Murphy, a New York Times spokeswoman, said the paper was “deeply sorry” for publishing the cartoon.
“Such imagery is always dangerous, and at a time when anti-Semitism is on the rise worldwide, it’s all the more unacceptable,” Murphy said. “We are committed to making sure nothing like this happens again.”
The cartoon drew hundreds of critical comments from people worldwide, the Times said.
Conant comments
It's too bad that people are so easily offended by political speech. While it is true that Jews are often accused of "controlling things," thus making them targets of demagogs, I would point out that the cartoon is a typical political drawing. The artist is accusing Trump of blindly letting Netanyahu run U.S. foreign policy. Though it's true that Israel is known as the Jewish state, the main point is that it is a state, not that it's Jewish, and thus political satire is to be expected.
The artist is commenting on Trump's policy of hewing to the neocon line. Whether you agree or not with this policy, certainly it seems reasonable to expect cartoons that target it.
Maybe the Star of David image wasn't necessary, but political cartoonists typically use symbols that make it easy for the viewer to get the cartoon's point.
Eileen Murphy tells us that the cartoon is a "dangerous" image. I suppose she means it stirs up Times readers to be anti-Semitic. Yet, on its face, the image seems a fair satire on U.S. foreign policy, which has upset a group of allies, especially with respect to renewed sanctions on Iran, something the neocons favor.
Certainly a cartoon like that doesn't make me want to rush out and do bad things to Jews. I view it as typical political art. We have come to quite a pass if we must fear the art as "dangerous."
The cartoon, published Thursday, portrays a blind President Trump, wearing a skullcap, being led by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel, drawn as a dog on a leash with a Star of David collar.
“The image was offensive, and it was an error of judgment to publish it,” The New York Times said in an editors’ note that will be published in Monday’s international edition.
Eileen Murphy, a New York Times spokeswoman, said the paper was “deeply sorry” for publishing the cartoon.
“Such imagery is always dangerous, and at a time when anti-Semitism is on the rise worldwide, it’s all the more unacceptable,” Murphy said. “We are committed to making sure nothing like this happens again.”
The cartoon drew hundreds of critical comments from people worldwide, the Times said.
Conant comments
It's too bad that people are so easily offended by political speech. While it is true that Jews are often accused of "controlling things," thus making them targets of demagogs, I would point out that the cartoon is a typical political drawing. The artist is accusing Trump of blindly letting Netanyahu run U.S. foreign policy. Though it's true that Israel is known as the Jewish state, the main point is that it is a state, not that it's Jewish, and thus political satire is to be expected.
The artist is commenting on Trump's policy of hewing to the neocon line. Whether you agree or not with this policy, certainly it seems reasonable to expect cartoons that target it.
Maybe the Star of David image wasn't necessary, but political cartoonists typically use symbols that make it easy for the viewer to get the cartoon's point.
Eileen Murphy tells us that the cartoon is a "dangerous" image. I suppose she means it stirs up Times readers to be anti-Semitic. Yet, on its face, the image seems a fair satire on U.S. foreign policy, which has upset a group of allies, especially with respect to renewed sanctions on Iran, something the neocons favor.
Certainly a cartoon like that doesn't make me want to rush out and do bad things to Jews. I view it as typical political art. We have come to quite a pass if we must fear the art as "dangerous."
No comments:
Post a Comment