Showing posts with label censorship. Show all posts
Showing posts with label censorship. Show all posts

Monday, June 14, 2010

One key difference between us and Japan - freedom of speech

Tokyo assembly votes down measure to regulate child porn in comics
(Mainichi Japan) June 14, 2010

We may have the First Amendment, but there's a law in the US that says possessors drawings of imaginary under-age cartoon characters (how is that even possible?) can be prosecuted for child pornography. Support the Comic Book Legal Defense Fund today.

Here's a new interview with its head - Spurgeon, Tom. 2010.
CR Newsmaker Interview: Charles Brownstein Of The CBLDF.
Comics Reporter (June 13).

Wednesday, June 02, 2010

Pulitzer Prize cartoonists' petition online at Cartoonists Rights Network


Now you can join the nineteen Pulitzer Prize winners who've created and signed a petition against censorship. Click through the link to add your name. It's up from seventeen signatories at the last time we looked at it, and has been generalized to be opposed to all censorship of cartoons, not just South Park's specific example.

Monday, May 10, 2010

Religious opinion on South Park and Mohammad cartoons in Saturday Post

In the Saturday Washington Post Metro section, "Limits to Religious Liberty?" would be of interest, especially the commentary regarding cartoons of Mohammad and South Park, but I can't find it online. The link to the print edition of the paper sends you to the Saturday On Faith blog.

At the blog I was able to find a few relevant articles, although not most of the ones quoted in the physical paper.

Sally Quinn. 2010.
Divine Impulses: Tariq Ramadan says Comedy Central is 'scared' of the Muslim reaction to South Park, Washington Post Divine Impulses blog (May)

Without freedom of expression, there is no democracy
Ex-Hindu monk, professor
Ramdas Lamb
On Faith blog May 6, 2010

Imposed or self-imposed censorship?
Professor, University of Mississippi School of Law
Ronald Rychlak
Washington Post On Faith blog May 7, 2010;

Monday, April 26, 2010

Thursday, October 29, 2009

Catching up with comics in the Post

Comic Riffs looks at a couple of dunderheaded decisions in the Style section –

Doonesbury shrunk by almost an inch in the latest redesign, but it’s back at a bit larger now:


The Post's 'Doonesbury' shrinkage: winning the Battle of Inch-On

By Michael Cavna
Washington Post Comic Riffs blog October 28, 2009

and Frazz, which has been exiled to appearing sometimes on the Kid’s page is missing this week because of a Halloween story which has a naked kid in a tree - god, you just can’t make this stuff up. The kids flip past, in today’s paper “TV report on breast self-exam bares all” and “The Dark Side of Peter Pan” book review to get to the Kid’s page, and they’re then protected from cartoon nudity. Anyway, here’s the story with the rationalization “
There was no way this could run in KidsPost so we decided to hold it out for a week.”:


Calling all comics readers: To save 'Frazz,' what strip should we send to KidsPost?

By Michael Cavna
Washington Post Comic Riffs blog October 29, 2009

In yesterday’s Style section (not the trend here), there’s a TV report on how inappropriate Family Guy is, at least as far as Microsoft is concerned:


Microsoft realizes that it's incompatible with Seth MacFarlane, after all

By Lisa de Moraes
Washington Post Wednesday, October 28, 2009

and a review of a play with an imaginary superhero friend:


A bittersweet 'Barrio Grrrl!'

By Celia Wren
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, October 28, 2009


Tuesday, September 15, 2009

Iraq prison abuse photos likened to Danish Islam cartoons by Justice Dept. says NY Times

The claim is made in

Obama About-Face Goes to High Court
By ADAM LIPTAK
Published: September 15, 2009
First the Justice Department decided it would not ask the Supreme Court to block the release of photographs showing the abuse of prisoners in Iraq and Afghanistan. Then it changed its mind.

The relevant paragraph reads:

In a book about the controversy surrounding the publication of cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad, the publisher [Yale Press] decided not to publish the actual cartoons. The government’s brief, in fact, cited the reaction to the publication of the cartoons in a Danish newspaper as a reason to block disclosure of the images of detainee abuse.

I'd encourage everyone to read the original article and perhaps someone could look into the government's argument as well.

Meanwhile, one of the Post's (conservative) columnists editorialized against Yale's decision - "Chipping Away At Free Speech," By Anne Applebaum, Washington Post September 15, 2009.

Sunday, August 23, 2009

Post calls kettle black

The Washington Post has again editorialized that somebody who isn't them should be publishing the Danish Islam cartoons - in this case Yale. As a letter writer pointed out in 2008, this would have more force if the Post hadn't refused to publish the cartoons when they were reporting on the story.

Thursday, August 20, 2009

Tintin Banned in Brooklyn

See "An Intrepid Cartoon Reporter, Bound for the Big Screen but Shut in a Library Vault," By Alison Leigh Cowan
New York Times (August 20, 2009): A21. The story appeared on their blog yesterday as "A Library's Approach to Books That Offend, New York Times City Room blog August 19, 2009, http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/08/19/a-librarys-approach-to-books-that-offend/?ref=nyregion


Saturday, August 15, 2009

American Association of University Professors president condemns Yale's cowardice on Danish Islam cartoons

See the Washington, DC-based American Association of University Professors' letter at "Academic Freedom Abridged at Yale Press" August 13, 2009.

Here's what the book's author thinks - "Culture Vulture: Interview with Prof. Jytte Klausen," by Helen Epstein, ArtsFuse blog on Aug 14, 2009.

Post on surpressed Family Guy cartoon [UPDATED]

This is sort of old news, having circulated around the Internet for weeks, but "'Family Guy' Channels Controversy Onstage," By Emily Yahr, Washington Post Staff Writer. Friday, August 14, 2009.

Oddly enough, a very similar story ran 2 days earlier by their TV reporter - "'Family Guy's' Look at the Lighter Side of Abortion,"
By Lisa de Moraes, Washington Post Wednesday, August 12, 2009.

Today's Tank for Post readers

Here's today's Tank. Presumably Sunday will be back to normal.

Wednesday, August 12, 2009

Yale to publish book on Danish Islam cartoons without the cartoons

Well, this seems totally pointless, doesn't it? Publish a book called “The Cartoons That Shook the World” and leave out the images? For more details, read "Yale Press Bans Images of Muhammad in New Book," By PATRICIA COHEN, New York Times August 13, 2009. Mr. Aslan's comments in particular should be noted.

Normally I would buy a book like this as a matter of course, but I'm going to boycott this one. If Yale doesn't have the courage of their convictions, I see no reason to support them.

Washington Post joined in censorship of Tank

The Washington Post was joined in its censorship of Tank McNamara. See Michael's story at "Keeping Score: Who's NOT Running This Week's 'Tank'?," by Michael Cavna, Washington Post Comic Riffs August 12 2009. He's also got links to how the story went viral. I'll steal one of his links here, for the record -

Washington Post pulls comic featuring Vick, Cheney
By CHRISTIAN BOONE
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution August 10 2009

And for those of us who still subscribe to the Post - here's today's Tank.

Tuesday, August 11, 2009

Keeping up with Tank McNamara in spite of the Post

Remember, you can't see the Dick Cheney strips in today's Post or their online site so to see the strips if you're a Post reader, here's GoComics site.

And the NY Times chimes in, noting that the Post is the only paper to drop the strip - Comic Strips on N.F.L. and Race: Fair Game or Out of Bounds? By RICHARD SANDOMIR, August 11, 2009.

Monday, August 10, 2009

Washington Post censors Tank McNamara

This time their own reporter, Michael Cavna, notes it as the Washington Post censors Tank McNamara for daring to satirize Dick Cheney because it was "inappropriate" - for details, see "'Dick Cheney' Orders a Hit on Michael Vick: Why YOU Won't See It," By Michael Cavna, Washington Post Comic Riffs August 10, 2009.

To see the strips if you're a Post reader, here's GoComics site. If I'm reading Michael's report correctly, the Post won't run the strips online either so going to their website is pointless.

Saturday, January 03, 2009

Reason's website review of The Ten Cent Plague

See "Friday Mini Book Review: The Ten Cent Plague," Brian Doherty, Reason.com January 2, 2009. Reason's based in DC, just north of Dupont Circle on Connecticut Ave for those of you who were wondering.

Saturday, December 20, 2008

Cartoons can put you in jail in America and Australia

People were mocking an Australian judge for declaring that cartoons using the Simpsons children in sexual situations wasn't just bad taste or copyright violations, but rather "Fake Simpsons cartoon 'is porn'" The BBC article by Nick Bryant noted, "An appeal judge in Australia has ruled that an animation depicting well-known cartoon characters engaging in sexual acts is child pornography."

Well, here in America, judges in Richmond (90 miles from DC) just did the same thing - "Child porn cartoon conviction upheld in Va." by LARRY O'DELL, The Associated Press, Friday, December 19, 2008. O'Dell wrote, "Child pornography is illegal even if the pictures are drawn, a federal appeals panel said in affirming the nation's first conviction under a 2003 federal law against such cartoons. ... Judge Paul V. Niemeyer noted in the majority opinion that the statute under which Whorley was convicted, the PROTECT Act of 2003, clearly states that "it is not a required element of any offense under this section that the minor depicted actually exists.""

There's a similar case going on now in now in Iowa that the Comic Book Legal Defense Fund is helping with.

I have a child, and have no interest in this type of thing, but one wonders why the First Amendment only applies once in a while. I don't recall any add-ons that say "except for photographs or artwork that we really don't like."

Saturday, September 27, 2008

Post ombudsman on Oliphant cartoon

Here's the Post ombudsman on an Oliphant cartoon about Palin, with a ho-hum sort of defense of free speech as it applies to cartoonists on the web, which after all, isn't really the newspaper, but if it had been the newspaper, well, then by god, we wouldn't have run the cartoon because it criticizes beliefs in god of 750 likely non-subscribers to the Post... aw, just read the thing - "The Power of Political Cartoons," By Deborah Howell, Washington Post Sunday, September 28, 2008; B06.

Dan Wasserman, the Boston Globe's editorial cartoonist had a better response in "Pentecostals peeved at Palin cartoon" basically arguing that if you mix your politics and religion, then perhaps other people won't bother to separate them either.