It is because I hold the Mail & Guardian in high regard that I find its views of the controversial Zapiro cartoon to be blatantly wrong and unfair, as well as brutally insensitive.
The attempts last week by its editor, Ferial Haffajee, and ombudsman, Franz Krüger, to rationalise and sanitise what was in fact an abhorrent, crudely sexist, violent and cruel cartoon were intellectually superficial and unconvincing.
Whereas the charge of racism was debatable and not easy to prove because it does not necessarily follow from the fact that Zapiro is white and those in the cartoon black, the blatant violation of the dignity and integrity of Zuma and the others was clear.
The most compelling reason the rape metaphor was repugnant is that it implied that Zuma is a rapist, even though he was acquitted by the very same judiciary that Zapiro says Zuma is raping. In this regard there can be no doubt that Zapiro consciously used the rape metaphor to invoke antipathy towards Zuma, not just as regards his alleged rape of the judiciary in the current crisis but also about the earlier rape charge on which he was acquitted. Therefore his denial of any discursive link with the earlier rape charges was dishonest.
When Krüger states that the job of cartoonists is to be disrespectful of those in high office, he fails to consider the constitutional principles of respect, dignity and integrity — to which all are entitled — and the socio-political and cultural context within which they operate. These principles have nothing to do with the prominence or otherwise of a person. A cartoonist has to be cognisant of these rights and exercise reasonable discretion and restraint, so as not to be terribly offensive, especially regarding the sensitive matter of rape. Instead, in this case, Jonathan Shapiro threw caution to the wind.
By stating that newspapers don’t have to be careful about political sensitivities, Krüger combines ignorance, naivety and arrogance about the current political situation and the wider socio-cultural context in which politics is played out. There can be no credible basis for this conclusion.
Haffajee also tried to carve an unimpeachable space for cartoonists. It was incredible to hear her say that they do not need to be accurate or truthful in their work. Both in theory and practice this is unreasonable, undemocratic and in fact bizarre.
She makes Zapiro — who insults the dignity and integrity of leaders — look brave, great and virtuous and the real victims look like the villains who deserve what they got. This is a pathetic attempt to turn the truth on its head.
We can never allow satire and satirists to occupy some holy ground and not be subject to critical scrutiny. We must not defer to sacrosanct and unaccountable cartoonist power. Cartoonists who have licence to do as they wish with callous disregard and impunity and editors who condone this do both the Constitution and freedom of expression a great disservice.