A great masthead bans political cartoons … now that’s offensive

The New York Times has announced it will stop publishing political cartoons from next month, in response to the controversy sparked in April by a caricature of Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as a guide dog leading a blind US President Donald Trump.

The NYT apologised, saying the illustration was “clearly anti-Semitic”. But the influential newspaper’s ban on cartooning is a terrible move, particularly from a masthead that has prided itself on award-winning political commentary.

Cartoons belong to a tradition of satirical coverage that has long highlighted the follies of the  powerful and the great. Benjamin Franklin’s “Join or Die” was an early 18th century example, as were James Gillray’s lampoons of King George III.

Those who were the subject of mockery were always expected to take it in good humour. Those who complained about being targeted were considered weak.

Of course, cartoons themselves should be equally open to criticism and they can certainly be confronting.

The cartoon that seeded the NYT ban would have undoubtedly caused offence to many. Further, the newspaper is a private company (although publicly traded, it is still controlled by the Sulzberger family) and can choose what it does and does not publish.

However, the recent spate of cartooning controversies shows we have forgotten the wonderfully transgressive and provocative nature of the medium.

When Herald Sun cartoonist Mark Knight depicted Serena Williams throwing a temper tantrum after she lost the US Open he was widely condemned. Knight’s intent was clear. He was mocking the bad behaviour of a powerful and gifted athlete. Critics argued his depiction of Williams engaged in racist stereotypes.

But exaggerated characteristics familiar to the audience are a necessity for the cartoonist. They act as mental shortcuts so cartoonists can convey their message in a few quick brush strokes.

If an Australian were to see a picture of a politician with giant ears and a pair of budgie-smugglers on they automatically know it is Tony Abbott.

Some caricatures are even more universal. Corrupt and greedy individuals are often drawn as obese, top-hat-wearing, moustache-twirling fat cats.

Likewise, the depiction of good guys and bad guys is similar throughout various countries and cultures. Baddies are depicted as menacing with aggressive expressions regardless of the race or sex of the person depicted.

Such a depiction of menacing figures is what caused trouble for The Daily Telegraph cartoonist Warren Brown.  Brown was criticised by former Race Discrimination Commissioner Tim Soutphommasane when he drew a refugee who allegedly assaulted two nurses.

Soutphommasane tweeted: “If we’re talking about a cartoon such as The Daily Telegraph’s cartoon yesterday, that was fearmongering. That was a clear example of (taking) a particular group in our society, or who want to come to our society, namely Arab Muslim men, and depicting them as a pressing threat to white women in Australian society.”

A quick look through Brown’s portfolio and you quickly realise he has a certain style for drawing menacing characters. He has depicted bikies and thugs who participated in the Cronulla riots in the same way.

Even though Knight and Brown were highlighting the behaviour of the people they drew, the main concern of their critics was the race and sex of their subjects.

Some cartoons have engaged in racist stereotypes for nefarious purposes. In the Australia of old, cartoons depicted Asians as predatory to create fear so people would support the White Australia Policy.

These depictions were meant to be demeaning. Therefore, the question we need to ask is, are racist stereotypes ever acceptable? And, to be even more accurate, are racist stereotypes ever acceptable in cartoons?

There are plenty of photographs of Serena Williams’ bad behaviour, and people wrote extensively about the incident. Should these photographs and words be banned because they engage in “racist stereotypes”?

Cartoons and cartoonists are obviously not above criticism. But it is important we put cartoons in their appropriate historical context.

We need to defend this form of artwork, which is by its nature and history deliberately provocative. Banning cartoons will deprive us of a little more satire and mockery in the world. And that is a real shame.