(THIS ARTICLE IS MACHINE TRANSLATED by Google from Norwegian)
On January 7, 2015, two Islamist terrorists – the Kouachi brothers armed with Kalashnikovs – slaughtered cartoonists and employees of the French satirical newspaper Charlie Hebdo, as well as the policeman who was responsible for protecting them. This under the pretext that they had insulted their prophet. Although no one will admit it, they have thereby demonstrated to the factions of society that feel offended by any criticism, that they have the right to censor it, or to retaliate physically or through malicious buzz on social media.
Terrorists then win the war over images – with the first victims being the satirists. This new censorship by the 'offended', which is becoming increasingly systematic, is followed up by the media billionaires. With their billions, oligarchs like Musk, Murdoch, Bezos and Bollorés control not only the media and the cultural sector, but also politics and society.
This is unfortunately nothing new, but after the Charlie Hebdo tragedy, it seems we have passed a point of no return.
The Trump administration is supported by the same oligarchs who will be associated with it – not to say that they will be its pivot. This threatens Western democracies, which are also dominated by the economic and financial forces that support the most radical governments – those that feel ‘threatened’ by freedom of expression. Freedom of expression is the last barrier against the dominance of the media moguls and their attempts to control our thoughts. If the death of freedom of expression only benefits them, the victims will be all of us who are still conscious citizens.
With threats from terrorists, the offended and oligarchs, few still exclaim “Je suis Charlie” – the motto of the demonstrations on 10 and 11 January 2015 in defence of political satire. Satirists are subjected to harassment, whether they try to express themselves without offending (self-censorship), and thus lose their critical power, or are forced to resign (when they are not fired). This happened most recently on 4 January [see above] with one of the best cartoonists in the American press, Ann Telnaes. She has worked for The Washington Post – which is owned by Jeff Bezos, founder and main shareholder of Amazon – since 2008.
Having prevented his newspaper, The Washington Post, from taking sides (as they did with the Democrats in the last election) during the US election campaign, Bezos now effectively sided with Donald Trump. At the same time, he received support from his oligarch friends in the inevitable conflicts of interest that are the main motivation for their support.
For this reason, we here at MODERN TIMES give voice [see below] to Ann Telnaes, who in her text allows us to understand the reasons for her departure. For the same reason, we publish the sketch of her censored caricature.
This is why I'm quitting The Washington Post
CARICATURE: A democracy cannot function without a free press.
By Ann Telnaes
I’ve been an editorial cartoonist for The Washington Post since 2008. I’ve received editorial feedback and had productive conversations—and some disagreements—about cartoons I’ve submitted for publication. But in all that time, I’ve never had a cartoon killed because of who or what I chose to point my pen at. Until now.
The cartoon that was killed criticizes the billionaires in the technology and media sectors who did their best to ingratiate themselves with the incoming president Trump. There have been several articles recently that these men with lucrative government contracts and an interest in removing regulations are heading to Mar-a-lago. The group in the cartoon included Facebook & Meta founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg, OpenAI CEO Sam Altman, Los Angeles Times owner and publisher Patrick Soon-Shiong, Walt Disney Company/ABC News, and The Washington Post owner Jeff Bezos.
Although it is not uncommon that editors on editorial pages object to visual metaphors in a comic if they are perceived as unclear or do not convey the message the cartoonist wants to convey, this drawing was not the kind of editorial criticism directed at it. It has been true that sketches have been rejected, or changes have been requested, but never because of the viewpoint underlying the comic's commentary. This is a game changer... and dangerous for a free press.
Over the years, I have seen my foreign colleagues risk their livelihoods and sometimes even their lives to expose injustice and hold their country's leaders accountable. As a member of the Advisory Board of Freedom Cartoonists Foundation in Geneva and former board member of Cartoonists Rights I believe that employed cartoonists are crucial to the social debate and have an important role in journalism.
There will be people who say, “Hey, you work for a company, and they have a right to expect their employees to stick to what’s good for the company.” That’s true, except that we’re talking about media houses that have public responsibilities and are committed to safeguarding a free press in a democracy. The owners of such press organizations are responsible for protecting a free press. Trying to get on good terms with a would-be ‘dictator’ will only lead to the undermining of a free press.
As an editorial employee in The Washington Post It is my job to hold powerful people and institutions accountable. For the first time, my editor has prevented me from doing this critical job. That is why I have decided to leave The Post. I doubt my decision will attract much attention; it will likely be dismissed as just another cartoonist. But I will not stop holding up truth to power through my cartoons, because as they say: "Democracy dies in the dark."
Thank you for reading this.
