What about this one Mr Currie?

hypocrites

Yesterday the NZ Herald displayed its cowardice in the face of Islamic terror by refusing to show images of Mohammed.

They claimed it was a long standing policy but inquiries by WOBH show that the policy has been in place a mere 6 years.

When contacted editor Shayne Currie said:

We’ve paid careful consideration to religious imagery since the controversy and backlash surrounding the Danish cartoons of the prophet Muhammad in 2006.

The examples you’ve highlighted below are news stories about billboards put up by a mainstream Christian denomination – our policy does not prevent reporting on debates within faith communities.

The policy as stated by The NZ Herald article is:

The Herald’s longstanding policy is not to publish imagery designed to cause offence to religious or ethnic communities.

It is not a response to the views of extremists or jihadists, which the Herald of course opposes, but to respect the sensibilities of mainstream believers.

The NZ Herald seems ok with insulting Christians, but not Muslims.

It also seems that presenting offensive imagery of other cultures is ok as well with this story from December last year about the case of a Kiwi bar manager on charges in Burma for using an offensive image of Buddha in his bar advertisements.

heraldhycporisy1

A New Zealand manager accused of insulting Buddhism in a promotional poster for a bar in Rangoon, Burma, has pleaded not guilty to three charges.

The trial of Philip Blackwood, 32, began in Rangoon yesterday.

He faces three charges of breaching the country’s Religion Act by depicting Buddha wearing headphones on a poster for an event at the VGastro bar.

Blackwood, originally from Wellington, is the bar’s general manager.

Bar owner Tun Thurein and another employee have also been charged.

The Herald snippets page shows the offending image clearly, and it is also contained in the embedded video on the page. The NZ Herald has published this photo despite it clearly being offensive to Buddhists, especially in Burma. They know the stroy is about religion and beliefs because they have tagged it that way.heraldhypocrisy

They have yet again broken their own”policy”.

When is a policy not a policy? When it is broken repeatedly and only favours one religion is when.

The NZ Herald are hypocrites and it is shown daily. They simply aren’t afraid of offending Christians or Buddhists, but are afraid of offending Muslims.

Here is the thing, I don’t think they should even have such a policy, they should publish the images, but since they do have a policy then it should apply equally or not at all.

The offending image

The offending image

If you Google “buddha headphones” you will see that this is a common image, even printed on t-shirts, but you certainly wouldn’t want to wear those in Burma.

Nevertheless buddhist tend to pour petrol on themselves and self-immolate when they are offended so there isn’t much risk to the NZ Herald newsroom staff, whereas we now know that ISIS and Al Qaeda Islamic terrorists prefer to slaughter journalists and cartoonists. Christians of course just get very, very cross with you.

We now know that the NZ Herald hides the truth and protects certain violent elements in society from ridicule and mocking out of fear.

They have ceded their editorial policy to terrorism.

 

– NZ Herald


Do you want ad-free access to our Daily Crossword?

Do you want access to daily Incite Politics Magazine articles?

Silver Subscriptions and above go in the draw to win a $500 prize to be drawn at the end of March

Not yet one of our awesome subscribers? Click Here and join us.

As much at home writing editorials as being the subject of them, Cam has won awards, including the Canon Media Award for his work on the Len Brown/Bevan Chuang story.  And when he’s not creating the news, he tends to be in it, with protagonists using the courts, media and social media to deliver financial as well as death threats.

They say that news is something that someone, somewhere, wants kept quiet.   Cam Slater doesn’t do quiet, and as a result he is a polarising, controversial but highly effective journalist that takes no prisoners.

He is fearless in his pursuit of a story.

Love him or loathe him.  But you can’t ignore him.

33%