COUNTERPOINT: Responsible free speech thwarts offensive behavior

There is no way to begin this piece without first stating that the massacre in Paris last week is not justifiable in any way. Such violence is tragic, and regardless of what prompted the violence, a human being must be, to some degree, delusional to take a human life, let alone 12 of them.

It must also be stated that the freedoms of speech and of the press are crucial to the framework of a just society. Without honest, free voices coming from both citizens and journalists, nothing would ever challenge the status quo.

France, the United States and the rest of the developed, Western world are in a uniquely privileged position in which we typically do not experience such large-scale violence, nor are the members of the press frequently persecuted when they express their beliefs.And, when such crimes do occur, they are dealt with as just that: crimes. Those at fault are prosecuted by the law and despised by the people.

Unfortunately, such is not the case in much of the rest of the world. According to the Committee to Protect Journalists, 734 journalists were murdered because of their work in the last 22 years. Last year, of the 27 journalists murdered only one received even partial justice. Two hundred twenty-one journalists were imprisoned last year alone, the second-highest number on record since the organization started counting in 1990.

The privileged position Western journalists are in have put them not only in the best position to advocate for their own interests, but also to advocate for change in places like China, Iran and Syria where their contemporaries are more likely to be silenced. If free presses ignore this window of opportunity or do not take it seriously, they are not only hurting themselves, but greatly disrespecting those still fighting for the right to print a newspaper at all.

If Charlie Hebdo were a late-night comedy show, its stabs would not be so controversial. Unfortunately, its political cartoons aren’t displayed at 2 a.m. on Comedy Central but on newsstands across France. Caricatures of nude religious leaders are not only wildly offensive, but also represent basic yellow journalism. Perhaps this tactic is productive in attracting a few extra readers, but it certainly cannot spark meaningful discussion.

The writers must have known that they were under some level of threat, especially after the firebombing at their office four years prior. They believed their mockery of religious leaders was worth that threat being realized, and that it was Charlie Hebdo’s right to express beliefs.

In a perfect world, the freedom of speech and press would mean that anyone could say whatever they wanted without offending anyone, even to the point of rage. Our world is far from perfect, however, and there will always be those who do not adhere to society’s rules.

The attack at Charlie Hebdo and the subsequent hostage situation at a kosher market were not attacks on freedom of speech. They were horrific crimes against France and against humanity. The press might, and ought to, continue exercising their rights and speaking their minds; this attack does should not prevent them from doing so.

That being said, it is important to step back from this tragedy and consider the privilege given to Western journalists. Pulitzer Prize winner and chair of the board of directors for Cartoonists Rights Network International Joel Pett says that the incident should serve to remind cartoonists that given their privilege, they must “draw about something that matters.”

There are no heroes in this story, barring the brave servicemen and women on the ground in France. What remains is not an unbridled war on free press, but instead a world in which the stakes of quality journalism are higher. Hopefully, publications such as Charlie Hebdo choose to use that freedom wisely.

Claire Cahoon is a sophomore majoring in English. “Point/Counterpoint” runs Tuesdays.