A little over a year ago, when the DI ran a cartoon that propagated negative stereotypes of Jews, many of us from both the Jewish and non-Jewish communities condemned the cartoonist, the paper and the editors. The people responsible were reprimanded and the message was sent that the DI acknowledged that it had been an unfortunate mistake. As someone who spoke out against the DI at that time, I was asked by a number of people, “Where were you when (fill in the blank with another ethnic group) was targeted in the paper. My response at the time was that my ignorance of those other transgressions doesn’t mean I have to keep silent when my own group is maligned.Unlike some of those other instances, I am aware of the recent decision by the DI to re-print cartoons from the Jyllands-Posten. That being the case, I cannot keep silent. What possible benefit is derived from splattering these all over the opinions page? We are told that it is so we can make up our minds for ourselves. I say that is patently ridiculous. Not being a Muslim myself, I feel uniquely unqualified to determine whether or not Muslims should be offended by this. It simply is not possible for me to truly see these cartoons through the eyes of the Muslim community. It appears that the DI is simply trying to be incendiary as a thinly masked attempt to spark public debate.

I applaud Chancellor Herman’s sentiment regarding the combating offensive (but free) speech with more free speech. I hope that others will respond in kind. That is a much more positive outlet for dealing with hate than the response of Hamshahr, the Iranian newspaper that is offering a cash prize for offensive cartoons regarding the Holocaust as a response to the Danish cartoons. Responding to bigotry with more hate debases us all. I hope that is something that we all could agree on regardless of race, religion or creed.

Joel Schwitzer
Executive Director
Hillel Foundation at the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign

Source: http://www.oc.uiuc.edu/announcements/di_rebuttal.html

I was saddened to see that The Daily Illini elected to highlight on its editorial page a collection of the infamous cartoons that have so offended Muslims around the world. I find the cartoons personally offensive and would have taken the position of numerous respected news organizations in America – including The Washington Post – and not run them. I believe that the DI could have engaged its readers in legitimate debate about the issues surrounding the cartoons’ publication in Denmark without publishing them. It is possible, for instance, to editorialize about pornography without publishing pornographic pictures.

The right of free speech and a free press are core values in American society, and I believe in them wholeheartedly. Yet the right to publish incendiary material does not mean a publication must publish that incendiary material. Editors and journalists have forever struggled with balancing the good that publishing a story will do for the public versus the harm it might cause. I believe the DI editors could have found another way to meet their responsibility to inform the public, perhaps by giving readers a Web link to cartoons, as one news organization has done.

It is the DI’s right to publish what its editors believe to be news. The DI is not a University-owned publication, and I would not want it to be. The DI is a real-world institution, and I only hope that its editors always seriously consider the real-world impact their decisions have on their many diverse readers and their community.

That said, I believe that the appropriate response to free speech that offends us is more free speech. As British philosopher John Milton said about truth in 1644, “Let her and Falsehood grapple: who ever knew Truth put to the worse in a free and open encounter?”

Speech alone is our weapon. Expression is our right. When viewpoints are debated openly and civilly, truth will eventually emerge. I am sure that the DI’s decision to publish will stir considerable debate.

Although I disagree with the DI’s decision, I am confident that we as individuals and as a University will always be made wiser and stronger by debate.

Richard Herman
Chancellor
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign