Brandon Krampert
In Motion Staff Writer
At the beginning of January, two gunmen killed 12 people at the “satirical” magazine office called Charlie Hebdo in Paris: five cartoonists; a columnist; a maintenance worker; an economist; a visitor; a copy-editor and two police officers.
The two shooters have been described as Islamists and allegedly had ties with al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula and deceased U.S. citizen Anwar Al-Awlaki. No official pronouncement by the AQAP has been issued to take responsibility for the shooting.
Revered by journalists, press organizations and public officials around the world as courageous martyrs for freedom of speech, Charlie Hebdo, in its cartoons has disproportionately ridiculed Muslims more than any other group. This includes drawing Muhammad the prophet, which is generally forbidden within the religion, as well as caricaturizing them as terrorists. Charlie Hebdo also has run cartoons targeting Christianity and politicians too.
What took place is reprehensible, but is embracing this seemingly limitless freedom in the press truly responsible or beneficial? While any support for state censorship of media would not be wise, in a time when Muslims who are a fringe minority in their religion commit acts of violence and other Muslims become marginalized broadly — by not only acts of terror that are perpetuated against them, but also in how they’re represented in media — these issues must be reflected upon. The UK-based newspaper, the Independent reported four days after the attack, there were at least 26 mosques attacked in France.
A column appearing in the Independent Florida Alligator, the independent voice of the University of Florida’s student body, posed the argument that a publication such as Charlie Hebdo could not exist in American college campuses. The columnist said, “The American college campus has become so politically correct that a publication like ‘Charlie Hebdo’ would immediately be scrutinized and shut down the day it went to print. The creators of the publication would be denounced as hateful, spiteful, bigoted, close-minded, backwards and every other derogatory adjective there is.”
Whatever political-correctness may mean since it is often open-ended in discussions on freedom of speech, all journalists have a responsibility. Journalists, artists and other producers of media have a duty to recognize the fact that we live in a world where people experience different forms of violence, institutionalized or otherwise, and should have a willingness not to rub salt in other’s wounds whenever conducting their work.
This is not censorship. This is not a call to stop producing content that may be traumatic or taboo. Rather, it’s to have a more honest conversation and to approach these subjects with greater empathy and greater awareness.