Results matching “cartoon debate to last”

In this section, John Zogby, CEO of Zogby International, and George Brock, World Editors Forum President and editor of the Saturday Times in the UK, comment on the results of the 2008 Newsroom Barometer. Both agree that the results show editors have opened to the new necessities of the digital age, while remaining strongly conscious of the possible threats to their newspapers and journalism.

(View the main results to this year's survey here.)

According to Brock, this year's survey points to the fact that "editors remain confident about a mixed-media future and have quietly got on with the business of integrating their newsrooms," but this is "tempered by anxiety that newspapers are not investing enough in recruitment and training for the future."

The path is clear for many editors: integrate the newsroom, think multimedia, train or hire a team of multi-skilled journalists. So are the threats: lack of investment, lack of training, lack of cultural change.

In the face of these deep changes for the newspaper industry and its organization, editors may often face managerial resistance to undergo these investments. But media companies must be bold. Their editors, for the most part, are ready to be. Said Brock: "I read the message of this year's Newsroom Barometer as an appeal from editors to their companies to be bold in the face of change and as a sign that they themselves intend to make the most of new opportunities."

For Zogby, who goes into more detail about the numeric results (see below), this year's results show that editors have adapted or are adapting to the current redefinition of the 4th Estate, the press, in light of the changes brought in part by the Internet.

"Perhaps the most important finding to emerge from the 2008 survey is that editors remain optimistic about the futures of their papers," as was the case for the previous edition of the Newsroom Barometer, wrote Zogby.

Yet this optimism shouldn't hide the urgency for newspapers to rethink their model. "For these editors the future is self-evident and our survey shows that they see the writing on the newsroom wall.  The evolution of the 4th Estate is no longer questions of if, when or how.  Editors now know the solution:  Innovate.  Integrate.  Or perish."

Read Brock and Zogby's full comments below.

Comments on the 2008 Newsroom Barometer by George Brock

Editors remain confident about a mixed-media future and have quietly got on with the business of integrating their newsrooms. The optimism is not universal and it is tempered by anxiety that newspapers are not investing enough in recruitment and training for the future.

Newspaper managements might reply that investment remains risky when it isn't yet clear where the income from digital publishing is supposed to come from. But newspaper businesses are made by content which creates and sustains demand. The first newspapers did not come about when someone assembled advertising platforms, distribution networks and hardware and afterwards looked for content to put into that system.

The sequence of events was the reverse. Somebody wants to tell as many people as possible something of interest or importance, discovers a sustained curiosity in that information or opinion and eventually a publishing operation grows up to supply the demand. The chain reaction is sparked by interest in the story, view, picture, interview, column, cartoon that's on offer. Without that first moment of ignition, nothing else happens.

You think this sounds a little basic? It is. But you would be surprised how often this simple reality is forgotten as today's media businesses struggle to adapt to a world in which digital technology is rewriting the economics of news publishing.

Online news and opinion has now been with us for long enough to see that no prediction about the future of news which is based on technology alone can tell us the future. Newspapers are not just ink marks on squashed trees: they are what people trust, they amuse people, in short they are a collection of ideas and information with which a reader forms a relationship. Where journalism - whether professional, citizen or any mixture of the two - creates that relationship, something lasting is born and can be sustained. You can see examples of success and failure both online and in print. As the first flush of online innovation and enthusiasm wears off, we can see more clearly that some of the online successes will grow very big indeed, but that only the best will prosper. Making information available - and the web makes it available as never before - does not make it wanted. Newspapers which innovate and adapt will also survive because their qualities are more important than the medium. Some of the failures in both online and print will be terminal.

I read the message of this year's Newsroom Barometer as an appeal from editors to their companies to be bold in the face of change and as a sign that they themselves intend to make the most of new opportunities. Most editors are clear that the essential qualities of good journalism can adapt to a new medium. They accept as a fact needing no further debate that their papers will now reach their constituency by several channels and not by one.

Redefining the 4th Estate: Opinions of the Editors by John Zogby

In the 550 years since the first pages of print rolled off the presses in the Bavarian town of Mainz, printed news evolved relatively unimpeded.  Even the invention and proliferation of radio and television failed to stymie the growth of newspapers, largely due to the ability of newspapers to provide more in-depth coverage.
    
The centuries-long hegemony of the ink and paper news model today faces its greatest threat--the advent of an independent and free Internet-based media.  This threat was evidenced at the height of the 2005 British elections with the publication of the 'Downing Street Memo' by The Sunday Times.  That short but potent document presented potentially damning evidence surrounding the planning in the run-up to the Iraq War, and while British papers seized the story, the leaked memo made only slight ripples in the American print media.  It did create, however, a surge within the rapidly developing blog community who used the lack of traditional media coverage as a call to arms.

Now, as the Internet struggles to define itself in the shadow of the Fourth Estate, the question remains: will these two mediums continue to battle for supremacy or will they find stability in an integrated symbiotic relationship? To help bring clarity to this question, Zogby International was commissioned by the World Editors Forum and Reuters to survey 704 newspaper editors worldwide for the second in a series of annual 'Newsroom Barometer Surveys.'

    Perhaps the most important finding to emerge from the 2008 survey is that editors remain optimistic about the futures of their papers.  As in the 2006 Newsroom Barometer, nearly all editors (84%) are optimistic about the future of their paper.  The editors surveyed are as aware of what the future may hold for their industry as they are unified in their recognition of the underlying threats and potential solutions.

The Future

    The majority of editors (56%) now believe that most news (print and online) will be free in the future--up from 48% in 2006.  Nearly two-in-three editors (63%) believe that within a decade the most common form of  news consumption will be some form of electronic media--whether online (44%), mobile (12%) or through newer electronic media like e-papers and tablets (7%).  Less than a third (31%) believe print will remain the most common form of consumption.

    The perception of editors with respect to the future is not limited to the news product itself.  The overwhelming majority (83%) agree that within 5 years their nation's journalist workforce will be expected to know how to produce content for all platforms (e.g., print, video, audio and web).  Still, perception of the future is but one dimension of the story -- the remainder is defined by the threats to the industry and  how editors address those threats. 

The Threats

    By-and-large editors agree on the nature of the threats posed to their industry.  The decline in youth readership (58%), the rise in Internet and digital media (38%) and the lack of editorial innovation (36%) all speak to the consensus that change is imminent.  These editors tell us their chief sources of pressure are from advertisers (22%), shareholders (20%) and political forces (19%).  All pressure, no doubt,  to confront the changing reality through innovation and integration. 

    On one issue editors paint a mixed picture--the current state of their newsroom.  For some (39%) circulation in the past year is up; for others (29%) it is down.  One-third of editors (33%) have added journalists, a quarter have lost journalists (24%) and for the rest (42%) the number of journalists on their staff remains unchanged from a year ago. 


The Solutions

    When a majority of editors (54%) report that they have an integrated newsroom, they may make such statements not necessarily based on the reality, but also out of necessity.  Regardless of whether integration has or has not occurred, nearly all (86%) agree that it will be the norm in the near future.  Editors also agree on the steps needed to address other threats.  Asked what investments they would make in their newsroom given the opportunity, the top two investments cited--training journalists in new media (36%) and recruitment of new journalists (31%)--demonstrate that editors are looking to make a commitment to the future.  And with the recognition that editorial innovation is needed, 69% of editors agree that opinion and analysis pages will play an increasingly larger role in the future. 


Yes, editors are optimistic about the future of their papers, but they are also aware of the potential danger on the horizon.  Less than half (45%) believe the quality of journalism will improve over the next year.  More than a quarter (28%) believe the quality will worsen; a finding reflected in the high level of importance editors place on the need for investment in training and recruitment. 

For these editors the future is self-evident and our survey shows that they see the writing on the newsroom wall.  The evolution of the 4th Estate is no longer questions of if, when or how.  Editors now know the solution:  Innovate.  Integrate.  Or perish.


Read Part 1: Presentation - main results, the integrated newsroom will be the norm
Read Part 2: Multimedia, multi-skilled and integrated
Read Part 3: The future of the press
Read Part 4: Who participated in the survey?
Read Part 5: Comments by John Zogby and WEF President George Brock
Read Part 6: Threats to newspapers, areas of investment, more results

It's been about two years since Cultural Editor of Jyllands-Posten Flemming Rose commissioned and published satirical cartoons of the Prophet Mohammad. The cartoons sparked a global debate on Islam and free speech, as well as violence in some countries. In a recent interview with Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL) Correspondent Jeremy Bransten, Rose believes that there have been positive changes at least inside of Denmark. with 17 papers reprinting the cartoon of Muhammed with a bomb in his turban.

A new opinion poll taken two weeks ago showed that 2/3 of the Danish population now think it was right to publish the cartoons back in 2005. The problem, according to Rose, is that Denmark, including its Muslim population, is ahead in the debate compared to several other countries
 
"It is between those who support the values embedded in the constitutions of the liberal democracies and those who don't," said Rose, as opposed to the Muslim community and "us."

Rose believes that the change in Denmark is "a combination of several factors" and "definitely the strong stand by the government [to protect freedom of speech] is very important."

One of the leading Muslims who had tried to take Rose and his newspaper to court in the beginning of the debate came forward to Rose, saying, "OK, we now know from the court decision that we live in a country where it is allowed to ridicule and defame our religion. We don't like it but we have to accept it."
 
"What is really controversial in this case," Rose remarked, "is that Europe cannot unite around one of its fundamental values, which is free speech and open debate. You should be allowed to say what you want without risking being killed or receiving death threats."

However, Islamic countries and Muslims inside Europe are reportedly pushing to pass laws to protect religious sensibilities. Rose states that "attempts to protect people's religious sensibilities is being misused around the world every day" and fears seeing Europe going down this road.
 
"I don't think that you should offend people just for the sake of offending them or make a provocation just for the sake of making a provocation," said Rose. "But I think we'll have to be very clear that in a democratic society, you do have many rights -- the right to vote, the right to free movement, the right to assembly, freedom of religion, free speech etc.... But the only right you do not have is the right not to be offended."

Source: RFE/RL
 

On April 11, a panel of famed international press cartoonists gathered at the French Ministry of Culture, to inaugurate the ‘Cartooning for Peace’ exhibit and debate the potential dangers of political press cartoons. Cartoons have a universal reach and pacifying effects, but they may also lead to just the opposite – violence and bloodshed. How then can press cartoons evolve to pursue their peace-making goals, especially in light of new subversive forms of censorship emerging in the West, and should freedom of expression be absolute?

A year after the Jyllands-Posten and Danish newspapers, followed by western media, chose to publish controversial cartoons of prophet Muhammad, culture editor Flemming Rose reiterated the importance of the debate sparked by the cartoons.

The hottest debate at this year's World Editor Forum was about -- you guessed it -- the lessons learned from the Danish cartoon crisis...

Tuesday’s World Editors Forum meeting ended with an intense debate about the infamous Danish cartoon controversy, and the lessons that might be learned from it. 

Lessons from the Mohammed cartoon clash will be the focus of the fifth session of the 13th World Editors Forum, which begins June 4 in Moscow. On 30 September 2005, the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten published twelve cartoons depicting the Prophet Mohammed. Sixteen years after the fatwa against Salman Rushdie and his "Satanic Verses," the clash between freedom of expression and religious values exploded once more. Panelists will discuss if there are limits for press freedom and how media responsibility can work in a globalized world. Don’t miss this special panel focused on 2006’s most fascinating editorial debate.

UK newspaper The Guardian’s online commentary/blog project Comment is Free is up and running. The site will combine staff writers from The Guardian and The Observer with over 200 outside contributors of “a wide range of experience and interest,” such as novelists and college professors. Perhaps the most compelling feature is that readers are allowed to comment directly on Guardian and Observer editorials.

The Danish newspaper at the heart of the Mohammed cartoon clash has agreed to discuss the controversy in a special session at the World Editors Forum conference to be held in Moscow in June. A senior representative of Jyllands-Posten, which published the cartoons that set off a furore in the Islamic world, will take part in a panel discussion of "Lessons from the Mohammed cartoon clash" at the World Editors Forum, which runs concurrently with the World Newspaper Congress from 4 to 7 June next.

Jussi Vilkuna, editor of Finnish culture magazine Kaltio, has been fired for refusing to remove from the magazine's website a cartoon depicting the Prophet Mohammed wearing a mask, and discussing freedom of speech with a cartoonist. The cartoon has since been taken off the Kaltio website.

After the Berlin newspaper Der Tagesspiegel published a controversial cartoon depicting four members of the Iranian soccer team dressed as suicide bombers one week ago, Germany has its own kind of cartoon row, as the Neue Zürcher Zeitung titles "Karikaturen-Streit nun auch in Deutschland" (= Cartoon row now also in Germany). German news magazine Der Spiegel described it as “One German Paper's Cartoonicide“. As the Editorsweblog reported earlier, Germany's Iranian embassy demanded an official written apology for the cartoon that is reflecting a current German debate over whether the army should assist with security at the FIFA World Cup this summer (cartoon see here). The Tagesspiegel expressed some regret at the reaction, but did not apologize.

 The Editors' Weblog has compiled a provisional list of the newspapers that have printed some or all of the cartoons since 30 September 2005, date of publication of 12 cartoons of the prophet Mohammed in Danish newspaper Jyllands Posten. Even provisional, this list is the most exhaustive on the internet, thanks to members of the World Editors Forum and to bloggers close to the EW.

The main conclusions are:

- to our knowledge, more than 130 national or local newspapers (excluding the student newspapers and online publications) published some or all of the 12 cartoons (sometimes just a pohtography) in approximately 50 countries . It also means that around 1,7% of the dailies around the world - 8,300 paid-for dailies according to World Press Trends 2005 - made the difficult decision to publish the cartoons.

- Europe was the continent where the most newspapers published the cartoons: at least 70 papers. It is not surprising that the Netherlands was the country most involved in the controversy (after Denmark)... a few months after the assassination of the film maker Theo Van Gogh by an Islamist activist. Same thing in France after the veil debate and the November 2005 riots.

- Within Europe, the first publications to reprint the cartoons in January-February 2006 were in general right-wing publications, for example ABC in Spain, Die Welt in Germany and Corriere della Sera in Italy. Then more leftist publications followed suit, for example Libération and Le Monde in France.

- Surprisingly, Arab and Muslim newspapers were also involved in the controversy from the very beginning, with the first reprint on 17 October 2005 (see below)! More than 12 Arab and/or Muslim newspapers published the cartoons. The decision to publish provoked terrible consequences for the editors-in-chief of these publications. Same consequences for some directors of television in Sudan and Algeria. 

- How to define the position adopted by American, British, Canadian and Australian newspapers? Media responsability, political correctness or self-censorship? The most surprising is not the position defined in many editorials (from The New York Times to The Guardian), but this strange impression of unanimity and consensus: only three regional newspapers on more than 1,400 newspapers in the States and zero newspaper, but a student daily in the UK for taking the risk...

- And what in the rest of the world? Nothing. Almost the desert for the publication of the cartoons in the Americas (apart Brazil), Africa (apart South Africa) and above all Asia (apart New Zealand). As if this controversy was only between Europe and the Arab world and if blasphemy was still relevant in regions as Asia and the Americas: not only about Mohammed, but about all religious issues.

My conclusion: the geography of the publication of the Danish cartoons tells us a lot about our democracies: what is allowed, what is forbidden... and what is taboo. In fact, it's more geopolitics than geography!

Germany's Iranian embassy is demanding that an official written apology be made for a cartoon, published in Berlin paper Der Tagesspiegel, depicting four members of the Iranian soccer team dressed as suicide bombers standing next to four German soldiers. The caption printed above the cartoon read as follows: "Why the German army should definitely be used during the soccer World Cup!" The Iranian embassy has threatened legal action if such an apology is not 'forthcoming'.

Illustration: "Mohammed the Prophet / The Fanatism", a tragedy written by Voltaire in 1741. Edition of the complete works of Voltaire, 1846, Société des publications illustrées (drawing by Moreau).

I love old books, but I didn't know one day I would be obliged to go to my bookcase to argue about press freedom, media responsability and the current Mohammed cartoons row. Last year in November 2005 I was already surprised that some French and Swiss Islamic organisations contested the live performance of Voltaire's play. For them, the tragedy was an insult against the Prophet and they asked - without success - that the play cease to be performed. But police had to protect the actors, the director Hervé Loichemol and the audience*...