He examines and responds to comments and complaints about the Globe's news and editorial content, and keeps the Globe staff aware of feedback.

E-mail him at ombud@globe.com or call (617) 929-3020. To leave a recorded message, call(617)929-3022

Stay in touch

Subscripe to this feed  

Add to My Yahoo  

Archives

Those questionable cartoons

Several Globe readers reacted to the Ombudsman's column on Sunday (2/12), which you can see by clicking on the "columns" link on the left side of this page.

Most of those readers who responded disagreed with my conclusion that the Globe exercised proper restraint by refusing to reprint the controversial Mohammed cartoons that have appeared in a Danish newspaper and re-printed recently in some European publications. The controversy has sparked some violent protests among Muslims in many countries, and a few American publications have chosen to display the images.
I offer here a sampling of some of the (cleaner) comments that I received in response to my column. Most of those who wrote to me didn't agree with my conclusion but some did. Reasonable people can disagree, but I stand by my position that free speech means an independent press which can decide what's right to print - or not to print.

Your column today (2/12/06) was an embarrassing copout for what was once a decent newspaper. By blaming the previous publication of offensive photos as something that happened "all during a previous ownership and leadership" is laughable as a rationale and dishonest to the core. It's clear you published "Piss Christ" because you knew that Catholics and Christians weren't going to stone your delivery trucks. You didn't publish the Mohammed cartoons because you let rabid Islamist fascists intimidate you. By not exercising your freedom to publish in the face of intimidation, you give up that freedom, regardless of whatever politically correct rationale you offer. And not only did you fail miserably in defending what should be your precious right of freedom of the press, but you only hurt yourself. Your failure to publish the cartoons simply teaches readers to go to the Internet whenever they want the full story, which drives a few more nails into coffin of The Globe. Does anyone care about your steadily declining circulation? Just keep giving readers more reasons to go to the Internet instead of the Globe.

Alan Radding
Newton, MA

Nice try. Very NYTimes-ish. When you re-read your article, I'm sure that you can understand why the circulation is down and continuing to fall. Did you 'barf' when you re-read 'it'? No. Not pisschrist; that one was easy to print.....the other one, you know the one which depicts somone with a turban shaped in the form of "sorry, can't tell you, might offend someone who may not like us". I suggest a new award for bravery, in the line of fire, to promote 'freedom of the press' and make all distasteful decisions go away. Envelope please. The very brave ombudsman who put his pen to the paper on 2/12/06.

Edward Leahy

The Globe's cowardice in refusing to print the cartoons in question is not surprising. There is a certain amount of self preservation involved that while I can understand, I cannot endorse. Secondly, The Globe has forgotten that it is in the information business. Why not let the readers decide what is offensive and what is not? Assuming that readers do not understand the details of Islam is equal to saying we are dummies and your friends at The Globe are here to save you from your own ignorance and prejudice. Thanks again for dropping the ball.

David Quinn

And then, there were those who agreed with the Globe's decision (and my conclusion:

For more than a week I've listened to talk-radio hosts argue that the print media is being hypocritical by refusing to print the "Questionable Cartoons". Their argument is that newspapers only cling to the First Ammendment when it is convenient to do so. I thought I was the only person to understand that Freedom of Speech is not only the freedom to speak, but also the freedom to NOT speak. Now I see I'm not alone. Keep up the good work!

Dan Kennedy
North Reading, MA

Dear Mr. Chacon:

Good for you! Aside from any Boston Globe “policies” that may exist and how they may be applied and/or interpreted, especially in this controversy is, in my view, beside the point. The point is to use good common sense, which is not always codified in a company’s Policies and Procedures manual, or whatever guide book a company may use. Common sense would dictate that one is being sensitive to other people. And while that may not past muster with the Jay Severins of the world, that is, to be polite, unfortunate.

As offended as I was by "Piss Christ," and other works of “art,” - art that would offend many global citizens, I do not need to see it more than once nor do I need to see my hometown newspaper reprint it because it can. As you point out, if I’m really curious and wish to see what all the brouhaha is about, a few mouse clicks will satisfy that curiosity – and won’t offend anyone and, more importantly, cause further injury or death to anyone. Who cares if Bill O’Reilly throws a tantrum? And, as much as I enjoy O’Reilly’s tantrums, I don’t mind being denied that little piece of entertainment over this issue.

Randy Cushman

The comments - both positive and negative - are much appreciated and are closely read. We'll try to respond to as many as possible. Some of them will also be included in my weekly internal report for all Globe journalists and executives.