March 17, 2008UVa's student newspaper censors for christMaybe it's the annual turnover of staff, but the editors at the Cavalier Daily, the student newspaper at the University of Virginia, seem to have forgotten what happened last year. Once again, the paper is under fire for running a couple of comic strips that Christians deemed offensive to their faith. The editors pulled them from their Web site over the weekend and issued an apology. Self-censorship of unpopular ideas isn't the lesson the editors of tomorrow should be learning. See the comics for yourself on this blog. How far must a newspaper go to satisfy religious righteousness? Those who criticized zealots for condemning Danish comics that portrayed Muhammad are oddly quiet now. Granted this one didn't involve violence and public death threats, but the cause of censorship is hardly the ideal on which America was founded. |
SearchQuick Thought
Recent comments
Monthly archivesCategories
Latest columnsToday's editorials
Letters to the editorAbout this blogThe Roanoke Times editorial staff engages readers in a respectful dialogue and exchange of opinion, including our virtual editorial board where you can discuss tomorrow's editorials today. Read more about the editorial staff .....Advertisement.....
|
March 17, 2008
UVa's student newspaper censors for christ
Maybe it's the annual turnover of staff, but the editors at the Cavalier Daily, the student newspaper at the University of Virginia, seem to have forgotten what happened last year. Once again, the paper is under fire for running a couple of comic strips that Christians deemed offensive to their faith.
The editors pulled them from their Web site over the weekend and issued an apology. Self-censorship of unpopular ideas isn't the lesson the editors of tomorrow should be learning.
See the comics for yourself on this blog.
How far must a newspaper go to satisfy religious righteousness? Those who criticized zealots for condemning Danish comics that portrayed Muhammad are oddly quiet now. Granted this one didn't involve violence and public death threats, but the cause of censorship is hardly the ideal on which America was founded.
Comments
[March 17, 2008 10:05 PM]
JoshI was just wondering how "oddly silent" the RT editoris would fall if the Cavalier Daily had a strip mocking gays or blacks or Muslims.
Nothing like a double standard for anti-Christian folks is there?
[March 17, 2008 10:20 PM]
Bill McClureChange Mary to a Mexican woman, and God to Allah. Then change Jesus to Mohammed. Then you will have more than Muslims and censorship to worry about. I thought the Danish paper episode showed the true nature of the Islamic extremists. I have yet to see anything even comparable from Christians, other than enunciating the idiocy of an alleged artist. Let the idiots show their stupidity, my faith can easily withstand these stupid cartoons by someone so shallow they have to portray gross exaggeration instead of a logical argument, or admit they're narrow minded prejudice. If the paper was merely admitting they were wrong, and correcting a mistake, then your logic would hold that corrections (which your paper makes frequently) are censorship. Censorship is also in the eye of the beholder. The paper that published did the action, not you or The Times! Who are you to determine censorship of someone else's paper. I would shudder to think of the editorial you would write if the Cavalier Daily editors would try to tell you what constituted censorship at The Times. You are right, self censorship is not a lesson they need to learn, but it looks like having good judgment and respect for all is a lesson they did learn well.
[March 17, 2008 11:36 PM]
VaGuyThere's a huge difference. The reaction against the Danish cartoons involved threats of violence and boycotts against the entire nation of Denmark for something published in one Danish newspaper. (And, it must be added, that agitators added outrageously offensive cartoons which did not appear in the newspaper.) In the case of the Cavalier Daily, those who were offended by the cartoon are expressing their opinions in a peaceful, respectful manner.
[March 18, 2008 12:03 AM]
c. trejbalYes, VaGuy, I said as much. At their heart, though, both groups seek to limit free artistic expression because it offends their religious sensibilities. Do you defend that?
[March 18, 2008 6:58 AM]
BUDyeah insult a gay, a muslim, a black - it's bigotry---insult christianity and we'll call it artistic expression. suuuhweeeet! funny thing too how this get's brought up on holy week. real class!
[March 18, 2008 8:33 AM]
JoshThis is so hypocritical on the RT editors' part.
I have had tens of posts rejected because the editors thought I was insulting certain groups. (Among my deleted offenses: calling Democrats "nutty", referring to Jim Webb's "dirty tricks squad", and calling Hillary "Thighlary", and saying a particular idea was "retarded") So free speech is fine for everyone else, but not this blog, I suppose.
[March 18, 2008 10:57 AM]
MichelleI found the cartoon tasteless and crass. I’m not for censorship of any kind, but that doesn’t mean I have to patronize papers that print trash (whether it is in the comics or current event section). It’s their right to print it and mine to turn my back on it.
Like others, I have become increasingly frustrated by the obvious double standard when it comes to what the media believes should be censored and what should be endorsed. That is one of the reasons I get my news from several sources via the internet. I would be more than happy to purchase a paper if I knew that its content was worth the purchase price. It seems like I remember a blurp on this blog a week or so ago on newspapers and profits. Perhaps newspapers aren’t seeing those 30% margins anymore because others feel the same way.
[March 18, 2008 12:04 PM]
HankThe Christians didn't threaten to kill people. The CD pulled the material because it was going to cost them money. It was an economic decision. If you want a good example of censorship, look at the Collegiate Times decision to refuse to run a paid ad from David Horowitz a few years back. They claimed it was "controversial". Oooh, in a college newspaper. Scary.
If the Roanoke Times is so concerned about this issue, why don't they print the Danish cartoons? I'll tell you why. They know what would happen to them. That freedom of the press stuff is just a theory.
[March 18, 2008 5:46 PM]
HankIt seems Rev Wright, Obama's pastor, has been saying a lot of controversial things. The videos have been appearing on Youtube. Now it seems someone is removing them from Youtube.
Censorship?