Publishing Muhammad cartoons would have been too risky, says Amol Rajan | Media | The GuardianPublishing Muhammad cartoons would have been too risky, says Amol Rajan | Media | The Guardian










Close






Skip to main content

 









sign in








subscribe









search




jobs






more


from the guardian:


jobs


change edition:



switch to the UK edition


switch to the AU edition







US edition




switch to the UK edition




switch to the Australia edition













The Guardian


Winner of the Pulitzer prize











home


›
media










home




US




world




opinion




sports




soccer




tech




arts




lifestyle




fashion




business




money




travel




environment







browse all sections
close







 











The Independent



Publishing Muhammad cartoons would have been too risky, says Amol Rajan









Editor of Independent newspaper said he had to balance principle with pragmatism, despite wanting to publish Charlie Hebdo cartoons on the front page














The Independent went with a striking cartoon by Dave Brown. Photograph: The Independent




John Plunkett


Thursday 8 January 2015 09.03 EST







Share on Facebook







Share on Twitter







Share via Email







Share on LinkedIn







Share on Google+







Share on WhatsApp
















The editor of the Independent has said “every instinct” told him to publish the Charlie Hebdo cartoons caricaturing the prophet Muhammad but described it as “too much of a risk”.
The newspaper, along with the rest of the UK’s national press, did not reprint any of the satirical magazine’s caricatures of Muhammad or the cartoons from Denmark’s Jyllands-Posten, with which Charlie Hebdo first provoked international outrage in 2006.

 Related: Charlie Hebdo attack: French police descend on town in hunt for gunmen - live 

Amol Rajan instead put a striking cartoon by Dave Brown on his paper’s front page on Thursday, showing a hand with the middle finger raised emerging from the cover of Charlie Hebdo. But he was “very uncomfortable” with his decision not to reprint Charlie Hebdo’s cartoons, which he described as “self-censorship”.
Rajan said he had a duty to his staff and had to “balance principle with pragmatism”.
“Every instinct that you have as an editor is to publish and be damned. You don’t like the idea of self-censorship, you don’t like the idea that you grant a victory to these religious fanatics by not publishing something that instinctively you would like to,” Rajan told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme on Thursday.



 Facebook 
 Twitter 
 Pinterest 
  expand 


Amol Rajan
Photograph: Justin Sutcliffe


“But the fact is as an editor you have got to balance principle with pragmatism, and I felt yesterday evening a few different conflicting principles: I felt a duty to readers; a duty to the dead; I felt a duty to journalism – and I also felt a duty to my staff.
“I think it would have been too much of a risk to unilaterally decide in Britain to be the only newspaper that went ahead and published so in a sense it is true one has self-censored in a way I feel very uncomfortable with. It’s an incredibly difficult decision to make.”
“What’s happened here is a bunch of religious fanatics have tried to silence cartoonists, have tried to silence satire. I think the important thing is not just whether you should show the prophet Muhammad, but to say that those cartoonists wouldn’t be silenced,” he said.
Rajan added that the decision to put a cartoon on the front page was in part a practical decision not “to be overtaken by events”.
Peter Huth, editor of German newspaper BZ, which did publish a series of Charlie Hebdo cartoons, said: “I must say we are not so totally different in the end because we both published cartoons.”
“We worked with the same tool to express our emotions, we did it in a slightly different way,” he told Today.
“We printed 43 covers that Charlie Hebdo printed over the last three or four years, not only dealing with Islamic issues but also with French politics … because they are a satirical magazine.
“What we wanted to do was honour their bravery, what they showed over all those years, and the other point we were thinking about was just journalistic, we had to explain to our readers what is Charlie Hebdo.”



Topics



The Independent




Independent News & Media




Newspapers & magazines




National newspapers




Newspapers



More…



Amol Rajan




Charlie Hebdo attack




Freedom of speech








Share on Facebook







Share on Twitter







Share via Email







Share on LinkedIn







Share on Google+







Share on WhatsApp



















 






related content












popular












 








The Guardian






back to top














home




US




world




opinion




sports




soccer




tech




arts




lifestyle




fashion




business




money




travel




environment







all sections
close







home




US




world




UK




europe




americas




asia




middle east




africa




australia






opinion




sports




soccer




MLS




NFL




MLB




NBA




NHL






soccer




live scores




tables




competitions




results




fixtures




clubs






tech




games






arts




movies




tv & radio




music




books




art & design




stage




classical






lifestyle




food




health




love & sex




family




women




home & garden






fashion




business




markets




companies






money




travel




USA




europe




UK






environment




development




cities






science




media
selected




crosswords




video











Media




›
The Independent








jobs

subscribe
all topics
all contributors

info and resources

contact us

feedback

complaints & corrections
terms & conditions
privacy policy
cookie policy
securedrop


© 2015 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved.






















 
