Charlie Hebdo makes fun of drowned Syrian boy.

jungleman · 16-09-2015 3:15pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Could the exact same accusation not be levelled against Charlie Hebdo? Let's see how it works...

"And as for those newspaper that printed a cartoon based on the image, do you think they did it because they actually care? The printed it because they knew it would sell copies, and would attract more clicks to their websites. They used a cartoon featuring a dead child to increase their traffic..."

I think it works pretty well.

Not really, they are two completely different types of publications.

Hebdo used a mock image, a cartoon, of the tragedy to satirise European attitudes towards the refugee crisis. It can even be interpreted as a satirisation of European media and the way in which they report on the crisis.

Hebdo are long and well known for using these types of cartoons which "shock" some people. It's their main selling point, always has been.

Publications which used the actual image on their front page did so in a different manner. If you want to believe that they actually cared, that's up to you and that's fine. The way I see it is that they saw an opportunity to use a tragedy to exploit sales and advertising revenue.

The difference is that Hebdo always has relied on resonating and sometimes hard hitting cartoons to sell their papers. The other papers generally fill their front page with more appealing images and big headlines. They came, they saw, and they exploited.

melissak · 16-09-2015 3:17pm

An File wrote: »

They'll hardly be spending their precious cash on a satirical magazine, in fairness.

Is it not plastered across the papers in the shops and across the internet. I didn't or wouldn't spend my money on the magazine either but i saw it

meeeeh · 16-09-2015 3:24pm

melissak wrote: »

Is it not plastered across the papers in the shops and across the internet. I didn't or wouldn't spend my money on the magazine either but i saw it

So are you suggesting that women start covering their heads because someone on the other side of the planet might be offended. After all people see photos.

Frankly I find your reasoning a bit ridiculous. Someone potentially might be offended so better not print it.

melissak · 16-09-2015 3:25pm

kunst nugget wrote: »

It's not an optical illusion at all. It's stripping away the artifice to starkly show us the hypocrisy of Western attitudes. You might find it distasteful but it's a hell of a lot less distasteful than what I've read on various threads here or what I've heard people saying over the last couple of weeks in relation to the refugee crisis.

Is it still an optical illusion if both pictures are clearly there and it depends on whether you see one or the other. I thought it was different than when your mind is tricked into thinking something is different than it actually is. Like when you think one thing is bigger etc. I thouggt there was a different word for it. We studied it in art but i can't really remember. You might be right

jobbridge4life · 16-09-2015 3:29pm

If anyone thinks that those magazine covers were making fun of Alyun Kurdi you have failed at the game of human intelligence. Please leave the internet and do not return.

Qualitymark · 16-09-2015 3:31pm

melissak wrote: »

What do you call those black and white pictures where if you look at the. Black you see one picture and when you look at the White you see another, like the one with tge young woman and old woman. This is what i think this is. Both pictures are there and both are intentionl a
Whilst this is cclever. To me it is not brave.

I don't think it's intentional at all. I think Charlie Hebdo is very plain about what it is satirising, and it's not the refugees but the hypocrisy of the powerful.

melissak · 16-09-2015 3:59pm

Qualitymark wrote: »

I don't think it's intentional at all. I think Charlie Hebdo is very plain about what it is satirising, and it's not the refugees but the hypocrisy of the powerful.

Was the Muhammad stuff also unintentional do you think?

melissak · 16-09-2015 4:02pm

jobbridge4life wrote: »

If anyone thinks that those magazine covers were making fun of Alyun Kurdi you have failed at the game of human intelligence. Please leave the internet and do not return.

Yes. You are the master of the internet and anyone who disagrees with you can't use it. Jog on

jobbridge4life · 16-09-2015 4:03pm

melissak wrote: »

Yes. You are the master of the internet and anyone who disagrees with you can't use it. Jog on

No not the internet Melissa... just intelligence.

kunst nugget · 16-09-2015 4:19pm

melissak wrote: »

Was the Muhammad stuff also unintentional do you think?

It was fiercely secular and attacked Christianity and Judaism too. It attacked Christianity 3 times as much as Islam if this article form the Monde is to be believed.

http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=fr&u=http://www.lemonde.fr/idees/article/2015/02/24/non-charlie-hebdo-n-est-pas-obsede-par-l-islam_4582419_3232.html&prev=search

kunst nugget · 16-09-2015 4:22pm

Interesting article exploring the myths surrounding Charlie Hebdo:

http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2015/05/charlie-hebdo-trudeau-pen-garland/392255/

Realt Dearg Sec · 16-09-2015 6:22pm

melissak wrote: »

Like when you think one thing is bigger etc. I thouggt there was a different word for it. We studied it in art but i can't really remember.

That's perspective. You would have benefitted from studying it a bit harder to be honest.

Notavirus.exe · 16-09-2015 6:49pm

I can't decide whether I'm for or against Charlie Hebdo's cartoons. Personally, I don't see why I should be shocked by them.

Boards.ie does allow free speech, just not anything that goes against Liberal views, so I can't explain my views on this.

humanji · 16-09-2015 6:56pm

MOD: Bitch about Boards in the feedback forum. Don't derail threads to take petty swipes here.

volchitsa · 16-09-2015 7:00pm

Phoebas wrote: »

Was there some secret code printed in the cartoon to tell us how we were supposed to properly interpret it?

Yeah, it's when it's printed as, you know, "satire".

Your question is a bit like someone taking Waterford Whispers seriously and asking what secret code tells us how the rest of us all knew not to.

Secondly, it's mainly due to a dumbing down of culture in general that makes people think satire has to be laugh out loud funny.
That's not satire - that's comedy. Satire has traditionally been dark and not that funny at all, but rather making a serious point. Was Dean Swift really being "funny" when he wrote "a modest proposal"?

Icepick · 16-09-2015 7:09pm

RobertKK wrote: »

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/charlie-hebdo-cover-cartoon-jokes-about-death-of-drowned-syrian-toddler-aylan-kurdi-10499645.html

https://twitter.com/islamaideology/status/642647579306684416?ref_src=twsrc^tfw

Jokes about Muslims drowning -

https://twitter.com/SimplyRim/status/643025434830065664

I never found drowned children or people for that matter as good material for satire.

Je ne suis pas Charlie.

No, they didn't make fun of the drowned boy.
They made fun of YOU.

Call Me Jimmy · 16-09-2015 7:13pm

People think they are mocking the boy who drowned?

Realt Dearg Sec · 16-09-2015 7:41pm

volchitsa wrote: »

That's not satire - that's comedy. Satire has traditionally been dark and not that funny at all, but rather making a serious point. Was Dean Swift really being "funny" when he wrote "a modest proposal"?

Oh, so I suppose this guy thinks it's FUNNY to eat Irish children, does he? I'm not offended by it myself, Swift can write what he wants, but I think he's doing it so that he will get a reaction from all of these Irish people, who have extreme elements in their society who will react with violence, and that will enable the English government (that he is quite clearly aligned with totally) to take even more extreme measures against Irish people. And after all, how many of those Irish would ever understand his so-called "satire" that all of these oh-so-clever intellectuals are defending but that I must just not have the secret code to understand?

Mardy Bum · 16-09-2015 8:21pm

This thread is a collective of those who struggle with visual literacy and critical thinking it seems.

Aidric · 16-09-2015 8:47pm

Mardy Bum wrote: »

This thread is a collective of those who struggle with visual literacy and critical thinking it seems.

It's like a Daily Mail comments section.

Qualitymark · 16-09-2015 9:50pm

The Irish were intelligent enough not to react extremely. They knew that Swift was satirising the cruelty of the British in Ireland.

melissak · 16-09-2015 11:19pm

Call Me Jimmy wrote: »

People think they are mocking the boy who drowned?

No. People think they are hiding behind the veil of clever humor to insult Muslims. Well I do. I can't speak for otvers. There are none so blind as those who refuse to see....

melissak · 16-09-2015 11:28pm

jobbridge4life wrote: »

No not the internet Melissa... just intelligence.

Dramatic slow clap in celebration of your intelligence. I thought we were discussing free speech versus insulting people. You think people less intelligent than you shouldn't have access to the internet???

Insect Overlord · 16-09-2015 11:28pm

melissak wrote: »

There are none so blind as those who refuse to see....

Yup, you said it...

melissak · 16-09-2015 11:38pm

An File wrote: »

Yup, you said it...

I feel like you are mocking me but think about it some more. Do you not see the two edgedness to it?

melissak · 17-09-2015 8:17am

Icepick wrote: »

No, they didn't make fun of the drowned boy.
They made fun of YOU.

Maybe, or maybe the joke is on you. Out of interest have you ever read the emperor's new clothes.?

Qualitymark · 17-09-2015 8:36am

Believe me, if I thought Charlie Hebdo were mocking Muslim refugees i'd be outraged too. But I don't think so.

AudreyHepburn · 17-09-2015 8:44am

I'll defend anyone's right to the freedom of speech to the hilt.....to a point. There are certain topics that just should not be made fun of imo and anything involving hurt and/or dead children is top of that list imo.

That being said, I'm not convinced that CH were actually trying to make fun of that poor little boy.....I had the impression it was more to do with the West's approach to Islam and it's followers.

If it's the latter that was their motive then fair enough.....but using Aryan's death to do it was not the wisest decision.

melissak · 17-09-2015 9:13am

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

I'll defend anyone's right to the freedom of speech to the hilt.....to a point. There are certain topics that just should not be made fun of imo and anything involving hurt and/or dead children is top of that list imo.

That being said, I'm not convinced that CH were actually trying to make fun of that poor little boy.....I had the impression it was more to do with the West's approach to Islam and it's followers.

If it's the latter that was their motive then fair enough.....but using Aryan's death to do it was not the wisest decision.

I don't know why people are under the illusion that france is some mecca of free expression. When the shooting happened we had two french wwoofers staying with us and they reckoned that this was far from the truth. For instance were i to wear, not print mind, just wear a tshirt with a weed leaf, like a reggae band tshirt, this would be illegal because it miggt promote drugs.

kunst nugget · 17-09-2015 9:28am

melissak wrote: »

I don't know why people are under the illusion that france is some mecca of free expression. When the shooting happened we had two french wwoofers staying with us and they reckoned that this was far from the truth. For instance were i to wear, not print mind, just wear a tshirt with a weed leaf, like a reggae band tshirt, this would be illegal because it miggt promote drugs.

And Charlie Hebdo was fighting against that suppression of free expression by the state.

Given how rigidly the French government restricts and controls both speech and the media, the important role of Charlie Hebdo -- and other publications like it -- is even more poignant. In fact, Charlie Hebdo editors are known for defying the government's recommendations and publishing material deemed "controversial."

"Charlie Hebdo has always kept its insolence, and since the caricatures crisis, it has become a symbol of press independence," said Bruno Patino, director of the journalism school at the Institut d'Études Politiques de Paris, known as Sciences Po, in a recent New York Times article. "The debate about caricatures overlapped others in France about freedom of speech and religion. It became the most visible."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rachel-ryan/french-censorship-and-charlie-hebdo_b_6438450.html

Charlie Hebdo makes fun of drowned Syrian boy.

Comments