Editorial cartoonist Michael Ramirez spoke to Fox News Digital about The Washington Post pulling his Hamas cartoon and revealed some details of his contract with the paper, and if that relationship will continue.
From Fox News Digital about the cartoon:
The conservative-leaning Ramirez shed light on his working relationship with Post opinions editor David Shipley, who handpicked the anti-Hamas cartoon after the cartoonist provided multiple options for him to choose from.
“In this case, we both thought that was a bold cartoon,” Ramirez said.
During the course of discussing the cartoon, its implications, and The Post pulling it details of Michael’s employment with the paper were revealed.
Ramirez, who is employed by the Las Vegas Review-Journal, has a collaborative agreement with the Washington Post so that his work simultaneously appears in both papers on Tuesdays and Saturdays.
While the [Washington Post] ultimately retracted the anti-Hamas cartoon, the Review-Journal is standing behind it.
As for his future with The Washington Post:
“He knew that I wasn’t happy with it [the cartoon being yanked]… And he begged me not to quit,” Ramirez said. “And honestly, I thought about the consequences of that. If I quit, then the cancel culture people win because they basically exorcise the Washington Post of my cartoon, and I didn’t want to give them that luxury.”
“So I told David I would do two more cartoons for the Washington Post and just see how it goes and then reassess our relationship,” Ramirez added.
As for any further comments by Michael:
The two-time Pulitzer Prize-winning artist told Fox News Digital he will have a cartoon addressing what transpired published in Sunday’s edition of the Review-Journal [link added] and will pen a piece to accompany it.
Further reading: Michael Ramirez interview with The Washington Free Beacon.
Ramirez expressed his disappointment over his cartoon’s removal, calling the move “a blow against … the freedom of speech.”
“When the intellectually indolent try to defend the indefensible, they always seem to resort to playing the race card,” Ramirez told the Free Beacon.
Ramirez expressed his disappointment over his cartoon’s removal, calling the move “a blow against … the freedom of speech.”
This action by the Washington Post had nothing to do with freedom of speech. Nothing. Any editorial cartoonist, as well as other political pundits in media, should know that and stop trying to use it as a shield from any and all criticism.
And if I remember correctly, you have papers cancel you entirely a few years ago.
Nothing gets a cartoon circulated more widely these days than being “cancelled” by its publisher. (Of which Mr. Wiley is also personally aware.)
It’s a weird world. Given Ramirez’s caricature style, his portrayal is pretty much on model. It’s not a terribly original trope, but that’s what you get when Hamas keeps using the same strategy. But print media was a world of no-backsies. You couldn’t pull something that was already out. The internet has made it possible to take stuff back.
The other problem is that editors are too scared of offense. I attribute this to Charlie Hebdo and it’s aftermath, where instead of showing solidarity with their own, editors cowered before the mob.
So now we have editors tucking tail and running every time someone says boo.
It’s happening on both sides of the spectrum. Steve Bell’s Cartoon was returned with the words “pound of flesh” when “WTF?” would have been the better comment.
Wiley is correct. While I oppose the removal of the cartoon, it’s not a violation of free speech. Nobody has taken away Ramirez’s free speech and the cartoon being published repeatedly online is proof of that.
Having a cartoon pulled by a newspaper or a tweet deleted doesn’t violate anyone’s free speech.
Also, I believe publishers should stand behind cartoons after they select them, for better or worse. And I don’t even think this cartoon is very bold as it’s a concept I’ve seen done by multiple cartoonists.
Ramirez isn’t really upset over this. It allows him to howl about “cancel culture” and play victim so he can continue to be the poster boy for right-wing cartoonists.
It’s always a violation of free speech unless you’re trying to silence college protesters.