In the past week, we’ve received blowback in letters and on social media regarding a political cartoon published in the Aug. 16 Torrington Telegram. Some people took offense at the depiction of an individual in Ku Klux Klan robes, saying it was over the top and had no place in our publication.
If you were offended, if you thought we were specifically attacking you or any individual, we apologize.
If you were disturbed by the image, which spoke to the violence and hatred spewed by White Supremacists, including the KKK and their ilk, specifically in Charlottesville, Va., and, more generally, in all parts of this great nation and around the world, the cartoon did its job.
Just as a side note, we found the cartoon offensive, also. But we also believed the message conveyed was important enough to warrant being shared as part of the wider, national conversation on the issues it spoke to.
“I don’t think it’s a bad think to anger readers or challenge them with uncomfortable political cartoons,” said Dr. Kristen D. Landreville, Director of Graduate Studies in the Communications and Journalism Department at the University of Wyoming in Laramie. Dr. Landreville specializes in the study of political discourse in the media, including political cartoons.
“Anger is the key emotion that has been shown to incite political participation,” Dr. Landreville went on to say in an email to the Telegram. “Research shows that people who are angry engage in political activities from voting to protesting to sharing political information on social media more than people who are not angry.”
But anger can be counterproductive, she went on to say. It can stifle productive, deliberative political discourse.
Political cartoons have played a vital role in the rich history of the United States, dating back to the “Join or Die” cartoon by founding father Benjamin Franklin. They rely on striking, sometimes disturbing, images to move individuals to take political action, to right a wrong. They are supposed to elicit an emotional reaction, which forces the viewer to think.
They ask us to question our own views on issues, to consider what’s going on in the world around us. People need to recognize why they are angered by a political cartoon, Dr. Landreville said, to avoid a knee-jerk reaction and look at the deeper meanings of the conversation and the actions that led up to it.
Including this particular image on the Opinion page of the Telegram was a considered decision. We find the image equally disturbing as some of you. It was not meant, at least on our part, as a direct attack on any one person. Rather it was meant to point out the hypocrisy, the narrow-mindedness and the decades of inherent violence associated with the group portrayed.
Challenging one’s comfort zone is key to the future of this country. Considered, reasoned discourse of opposite sides of an issue – in other words, disagreement – is at the very core of the Democratic process.
If we always agree, if opposing views don’t challenge us, nothing ever gets done and nothing ever changes.
“Political satire and political cartoons are absolutely essential to the health of a democracy,” Dr. Landreville said. “The people must be able to freely question their authority, institutions and culture. The visceral nature of visual communications through political cartoons is a powerful way to do so.”
We urge our readers to continue this conversation. It’s important to our region and our nation.
We invite Letters to the Editor on this or any topic which peaks your interest.
