Rupert Murdoch apologizes for NY Post ’shoot the chimp’ cartoon
Here’s what appeared in the New York Post today:
As the Chairman of the New York Post, I am ultimately responsible for what is printed in its pages. The buck stops with me.
Last week, we made a mistake. We ran a cartoon that offended many people. Today I want to personally apologize to any reader who felt offended, and even insulted.
Over the past couple of days, I have spoken to a number of people and I now better understand the hurt this cartoon has caused. At the same time, I have had conversations with Post editors about the situation and I can assure you – without a doubt – that the only intent of that cartoon was to mock a badly written piece of legislation. It was not meant to be racist, but unfortunately, it was interpreted by many as such.
We all hold the readers of the New York Post in high regard and I promise you that we will seek to be more attuned to the sensitivities of our community. Source
Good for Murdoch. This is an effective and decent response to the situation. I am pleased to read that he has spoken with people who offered insight that he then considered. As I stated earlier, my biggest beef with the cartoon was that it was offensive given that a woman had just had her face and eyes chewed out and the history of the NYPD shooting unarmed people of color. I got the ‘Obama as chimp’ implication, but I think that was unconscious on the writer’s part – not excusable necessarily but I do not believe that that was the intended message.
I do think the appearance of the cartoon and the response to it illustrates not only how different our prisms through which we see the world are, but that we, of all colors, would rather yell at each other than sit down over a beer and hash it out.
It’s hashing time, folks.
Sorry, Carmz, but I just don’t get it that the cartoonist was unconscious of the message his cartoon would send across this country and the world. He and his editor should be replaced. To me, it was a message that begged shot the messenger, assassinate him. Murdoch cannot apologize enough for hiring and maintaining the kind of liars and assorted bigots he surrounds his publications and other media with.
I find it difficult to believe that the writer/illustrator/editor didn’t at least PAUSE before releasing a cartoon that clearly has fast racial undertones. There is no logic here…
Hi dancinginthedark and Katherine, thanks for your comments.
I would really like to know how old the cartoonist is and where he comes from. If he’s older than 45 and from the south, then that would definitely influence my characterization of his intent. If he’s younger than 40 and from say the state of Washington, I am not so sure.
The one thing I can say for sure, is that insults that are so obvious to some are absolutely invisible to others. It doesn’t mean they don’t exist. The other thing I know is that this cartoon was reviewed by editors some of whom definitely felt that hesitation you speak about Katherine. I question the intent of the editors more.
And sorry, I was in the mainstream media for more than a decade. Murdoch does not have the fix on liars and bigots. Trust.
nope, not buying it. my big problem with the cartoon is that it was left ambiguous. why not label the monkey and explicitly say what it was supposed to represent? the joke wouldn’t have been lost and such labels are not beyond the pail. by not doing so, you are asking for interpretation, which means you are asking folks to think it should be obama if they want to look at it that way, at which point all the criticism is valid. the idea that some people may have been offended is beside the point. just say it was stupid.
The race card began when Arican-American arrived on these shores. We were labelled Negroes and then downgrades to niggars. Any and all forms of violence has been justified under the title which has happen on a regular base and continues to occur. Only those who live in this constant fear can understand the problems. African-Americns have been referred to as monkey, apes an anything degrading and for the most part we we are told it should not matter. God Bless America.
again, Monkey see, monkey do
I don’t care if Mr. Delonas, the cartoonist, was unaware of the potential offensiveness of his cartoon. He and the rest of the press are absolutely not obligated to consider the sensibilities of blacks. There is nothing special about that minority.
Freedom of speech in America extends to all of us. So I support Mr. Delonas and all the editorial staff who approved or at least permitted his chimp cartoon. It was political commentary – that’s all. And Mr. Murdoch was wrong to apologize he should never give in to a small group of loud-mouths.
Hi Lyn, thank you for your comment. I am sure you are not characterizing the many thousands and thousands of us, of ALL colors, who expressed displeasure with Delonas’ cartoons as a “small group of loud-mouths.” Afterall you, like me, champion free speech. I certainly would not characterize Delonas’ cartoon as a whisper.
As I said in my post, I believe the Post should have held its position and dealt head on with the ensuing economic fall out from customers choosing to purchase other papers instead of the Post. I believe Murdoch was sincere. I believe the Post’s editorial board couldn’t care less.
While Murdoch’s apology is better than the original Post’s….only by a little. It is still directed to those “oversensitive” who “might” have been offended.
I am not ready to give Delonas the benefit of any doubt. To me, certainly not an oversensitive type, at the very least, he’s a jerk. If the Post can not recognize that possibility, then they should revisit some of his other cartoons.
http://gawker.com/5155855/ten-masterpieces-from-sean-delonas
I wonder what percent of the blind think they are able to see? Oh, I see. There is such a condition as being “legally blind”
Really? Good for Him? Actually it's quite telling that he has no idea what could symbolize racism. Sometimes it is very subtle but the message's meaning is clear. In this case the message is not very subtle. I can also understand some things are truly not meant to be racist but are interpreted as such. So now there is the problem, what is racist and what is not? And to add to that the racist can hide in the ignorance factor.
Really? Good for Him? Actually it's quite telling that he has no idea what could symbolize racism. Sometimes it is very subtle but the message's meaning is clear. In this case the message is not very subtle. I can also understand some things are truly not meant to be racist but are interpreted as such. So now there is the problem, what is racist and what is not? And to add to that the racist can hide in the ignorance factor.
Leave your response!
Translate
Recent Comments
Twitterisma!
Recent Trackbacks
Laps and Tune Ups
Blogroll
Racing Through the Archives
Most Commented
Subscribe to Feeds: Entries (RSS) | Comments (RSS) | Carmentown(6) Theme customized&illustrated by XOLAGRAFIK Arte&Illo and built on the Arthemia theme by Michael Hutagalung