How would the MSM cover “Chocolate Mohammed” at Ramadan?

By Michelle Malkin  •  March 30, 2007 01:07 PM

Updated below

How would the MSM cover an artist exhibition of a “Chocolate Mohammed” timed to coincide with Ramadan?

They wouldn’t.

But find an artist to mock Jesus at Easter with a chocolate sculpture…

chocolatejesus.jpg

…and you’ll get wall-to-wall coverage. “Chocolate Jesus” is on Fox, MSNBC, and ABC. And CNN. And all over the web.

No pixelation. No withholding the photos in the name of respect for Christianity. No taboos.

Where’s the MSM’s concern for avoiding deliberately provocative religious insults now?

Remember?

“CNN has chosen to not show the cartoons in respect for Islam.”

“CNN is not showing the negative caricatures of the likeness of Prophet Mohammed because the network believes its role is to cover the events surrounding the publication of the cartoons while not unnecessarily adding fuel to the controversy itself.”

And remember:

“They wouldn’t meet our standards for what we publish in the paper,” said Leonard Downie, Jr., executive editor of The Washington Post, which ran a front-page story on the issue Friday, but has not published the cartoons. “We have standards about language, religious sensitivity, racial sensitivity and general good taste.”

At USA Today, deputy foreign editor Jim Michaels offered a similar explanation. “At this point, I’m not sure there would be a point to it,” he said about publishing the cartoons. “We have described them, but I am not sure running it would advance the story.” Although he acknowledged that the cartoons have news value, he said the offensive nature overshadows that.

The Boston Globe, while acknowledging the right of newspapers to print material that may offend, argues that “newspapers ought to refrain from publishing offensive caricatures of Mohammed in the name of the ultimate Enlightenment value: tolerance.”

In the land of media dhimmitude, tolerance is a one-way street.

***

Update: “Chocolate Jesus” has been cancelled. The “artist” is now whining about a “Catholic fatwa.”

Seriously.

Add your opinion

Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.

Trackbacks

  1. JammieWearingFool
  2. Unpartisan.com Political News and Blog Aggregator
  3. Dean's World
  4. Plains Feeder
  5. Old War Dogs
  6. Bill's Bites
  7. Random Jottings
  8. Dave Lucas
  9. Captain's Quarters
  10. Maggie's Farm
  11. Sierra Faith
  12. Right Pundits
  13. The People's Republic of Seabrook
  14. Pajamas Media
  15. stikNstein....has no mercy
  16. "7.62mm Justice" ™
  17. What the heck is art

Trackback URL

You must be logged in to post a comment.

The Duke rape case the MSM won’t cover

June 29, 2009 11:38 AM by Michelle Malkin

105 Comments | 9 Trackbacks

The NYTimes-Wikipedia whitewash

June 29, 2009 06:32 AM by Michelle Malkin

42 Comments | 3 Trackbacks

Two disappearing acts, one tabloid circus

June 24, 2009 10:59 AM by Michelle Malkin

53 Comments | 8 Trackbacks

Introducing the fly-by media

June 17, 2009 12:42 PM by Michelle Malkin

156 Comments | 15 Trackbacks

“The poise! The cupping!”

The Ensign affair vs. the Conyers case

June 17, 2009 06:02 AM by Michelle Malkin

38 Comments | 8 Trackbacks

Most transparent administration ever adopts Bush visitor log policy

June 16, 2009 10:11 AM by Michelle Malkin

33 Comments | 9 Trackbacks

Yes, they can!

David Letterman: Perv

June 12, 2009 04:32 AM by Michelle Malkin

766 Comments | 53 Trackbacks

Why they hate us

June 11, 2009 11:42 AM by Michelle Malkin

195 Comments | 23 Trackbacks


Categories: Double standards, Media Bias



Pundit & Pundette

» Is the tide turning?