Having first brought the religious cartoon comic controversy to the University campus by reprinting the Jyllands-Posten comic depictions of Mohammed, the Oregon Commentator is proud to have touched off one of the more lively debates on campus in
recent memory. Unfortunately, lively debates are not always accurate, and the intentions of the Commentator in printing this controversial material have been widely and consistently misunderstood, most recently by the Daily Emerald’s FourPlay columnist, Carrie Packwood Freeman.
In her July 13 column (“The Ethics Behind: Religious Cartoons”), Ms. Packwood Freeman blithely conflates the intentions of the Commentator with those of The Insurgent in printing its aroused Jesus comics, a comparison unsupported by even the most cursory reading of the editorials accompanying both publications. The Insurgent printed roughly four editorials explaining its intentions in creating the series of Jesus comics, nearly all of which mentioned explicit critiques of the Christian religion.
This approach certainly does reflect what Ms. Packwood Freeman describes as trying to “push the envelope and be overtly sacrilegious, demonstrating that religion, which has some harmful social consequences, does not deserve a special status that makes it immune to satire or criticism.”
In sharp contrast, the Commentator printed the Mohammed cartoons not because we thought we could provoke more controversy (as there had already been fatal riots over the issue) but rather to highlight the fact that two students at the University of Illinois’ “Daily Illini” had been suspended from
their jobs for printing the same images.
In standing in solidarity with those punished for their free expression, we reaffirmed our belief in open societies and expressed dismay in political leadership on all sides for squandering a teachable moment in which to present the benefits of open public discourse.
Had Ms. Packwood Freeman actually read the materials she was criticizing, she would have recognized the obvious differences in tone and content, and would not have lumped both publications in the same category as being equally open to her cookie-cutter ethical critiques. The Oregon Commentator always welcomes criticism of its material, provided it actually reflects the actual content printed in its pages.
Ted Niedermeyer is Editor-In-Chief of the Oregon Commentator
Criticism of the Commentator shows ignorance of publication’s content
Daily Emerald
July 19, 2006
0
More to Discover