The New York Times has no problem printing a picture of the Virgin Mary covered in dung in today’s (Wednesday 2-8-06) edition:
But just yesterday they refused to print this picture of Muhammad with a donkey:
This was their explanation for not printing the cartoons from yesterday’s editorial:
The New York Times and much of the rest of the nation’s news media have reported on the cartoons but refrained from showing them. That seems a reasonable choice for news organizations that usually refrain from gratuitous assaults on religious symbols, especially since the cartoons are so easy to describe in words.
…Unless of course the religious symbol happens to be a Christian symbol?!!
From Times Watch today:
Just yesterday the Times wrote in an editorial on the Danish cartoons of Mohammad that “The New York Times and much of the rest of the nation’s news media have reported on the cartoons but refrained from showing them. That seems a reasonable choice for news organizations that usually refrain from gratuitous assaults on religious symbols, especially since the cartoons are so easy to describe in words.”
Apparently the Arts pages didn’t get the memo, because it runs a photo of Chris Ofili’s dung-clotted “Holy Virgin Mary” in Wednesday’s Arts section story by Michael Kimmelman, who calls the Danish cartoons “callous and feeble.”
This is the most striking example yet of the double standard by the Times when it comes to art that offends religious sensibilities.
Hat Tip Larwyn
