Black folks have been shrugging their shoulders at the New York Post since before I was born, so I was kind of surprised to see them issue a semi-apology for the chimp cartoon produced by Sean Delonas. The cartoon is rather tame by Post standards, especially considering the material they were producing when New York City was genuinely gripped by racial tension, so I'm a bit surprised to see people planning to protest the paper.
I'll also say that while I think the cartoon was offensive, I don't think the Post should have apologized, even half-heartedly. I don't think, in general, that newspapers should apologize for printing material people find offensive. I think they should only apologize when they're factually wrong about something, which is sadly more often than they admit. Barack Obamais also a public figure, and while the cartoon, by virtue of being a racialized message, extends its fire to all black folks and not just the president, I don't really think it's the most effective or meaningful expression of outrage. It's mostly easy. My solution? Stop reading the freaking New York Post, and they'll get the message.
I find the Washington Post's printing of George Will's column, and their subsequent refusal to issue a correction despite Will's distortions, far more offensive. Newspapers are often on the frontlines of the battle to maintain the liberties guaranteed by the First Amendment, but publications like the Washington Post are obligated to hold themselves to a certain standard of truth and accuracy. The New York Post apologized for their cartoon, but as a newspaper, the Washington Post committed the far greater offense.
-- A. Serwer
