Tuesday, February 19, 2008

Not for prophet

It's cultural relativism gone mad, I reckon.

"It looks like a no-brainer. Wikipedia is refusing to remove images of the Prophet Muhammad from its site, despite an online campaign involving tens of thousands of Muslims.

And the owners of the online encyclopedia are right. As they state, 'Wikipedia is not censored for the benefit of any particular group'. Anyone offended by the presence of the images can reset their computers so they don't appear. Unlike the saga of the Danish cartoons, these images, dating from the 14th-16th centuries, were not intended to offend or provoke Muslim sensibilities, or even to raise issues of censorship or religious sensibility.

But Wikipedia's justification of its actions contains some interesting qualifications..."

For the whole damn thing, go here.


FirstNations said...

Now research the rumored connection between the C of L.Ron, headquartered in Clearwater, FLA, and Wikipedia.

Rimshot said...

I suppose the equivalent would be an Islamic based site with offensive images of Bill Gates, Ronald McDonald and Lara Croft...erm...Angelina Jolie.

Tim Footman said...

You mean Wikipedia is spreading CruiseNotAGay misinfo among its credulous users, FN?

That's right, Rimshot. Madrassas full of earnest young men pleasuring themselves over shots of Ms Jolie in unfeasibly tight singlets. That's what Osama wants.

patroclus said...

I very much enjoyed your reaction to being called 'one of the few REAL JOURNALISTS left in this prejudiced world'.

Tim Footman said...

Thank you. I suspect M*x G*g*rty has suddenly replaced Nathan Barley as shorthand for all that is wrong in the meeja universe.