How can a commentator not write about Charlie Hebdo?
My first impulse was to publish caricatures of Mohammed, Moses, Jesus (of Nazareth, not the Mariners’ Jesus Montero), Buddha, and perhaps Ganesh, Zeus and Odin so polytheists wouldn’t feel left out. That would show ’em!
I’m less sure what exactly it would show ’em. Probably, it would have shown how easily I’m manipulated. That’s all anyone shows when they react predictably to a provocation.
In any event, I doubt it would show ’em anything at all. It would just be posturing. Because while I do have a few members of the clergy as subscribers (!) to the best of my knowledge leaders and adherents of radical Islam don’t read KJR. Why would they? The last thing they have in mind is keeping anything running.
I say “radical Islam,” not to avoid offending anyone. I say it because most Muslems condemn both the attack and the mentality behind it.
A letter-writer to the local newspaper asked why the Imams have been silent instead of roundly condemning the attack. If you’re wondering too, a little bit of Googling reveals that the Imams haven’t been silent. Other than those who preach radical Islam, many have been quite vocal and roundly condemning. Strangely, the American press appears to have, shall we say, under-reported this aspect of the story.
And if you’re among those who figure this sort of violence to be intrinsic to Islam because the Quran says something or other that seems to encourage it, consider this:
At other times in history, Islam was the world’s bastion of religious tolerance while Christianity was busily instituting the Inquisition. Neither of their religious texts have changed at all. Something that hasn’t changed is unlikely to be the cause of an effect that has changed — an unoriginal but important point to consider in this debate.
Another letter-writer pointed out that the First Amendment protects the newspaper’s right to use the n-word in print, asserting that newspapers don’t do so, not because they can’t, but because doing so would offend lots of people, and not only those to whom the n-word refers.
I sure hope that isn’t the reason. Not publishing (or saying in public) something because it might offend someone is a poor decision for quite a few reasons, the most important of which is how easily many people manage to become offended. Not saying something because someone might take offense is just another way of taking a vow of silence.
The difference between trying to avoid offending anyone and deciding to not be offensive isn’t a fine distinction. It’s the difference between cowardice and class.
A newspaper using the n-word as a routine adjective would be entirely lacking in class. The proper response would be to read a different newspaper. Publishing it as part of an exact quote is a different matter: Not doing so would be a failure to accurately depict the individual being quoted.
Blazing Saddles is worth mentioning in this context. When Mel Brooks first released the movie there were plenty of people who condemned it for its promiscuous use of the n-word in its dialog, just as there are still plenty of Americans who would prefer to ban Huckleberry Finn from school library shelves because children might read the name “Nigger Jim” and think that makes the n-word okay.
Personal opinion: Sanitizing either work would insult its audience while greatly reducing its very clear anti-racism message. That neither Mark Twain nor Mel Brooks received death threats probably needs no mention here. In any event they didn’t, and shouldn’t have.
Does this have anything at all to do with business leadership, IT leadership, or any other dimension of management in all its forms?
I think so, and it has to do with how we respond to public criticism.
The perpetrators of the Charlie Hebdo massacre were punishing people who, they thought, had ridiculed and criticized their prophet.
Meanwhile, here in the U.S.A., it’s routine for managers to terminate employees who, on their own private time and publishing venues, criticize or ridicule their employers in public.
Sure, there are differences: Murder is illegal, firing an employee is not. Murder is unconscionable, termination is, depending on the employee’s circumstances, somewhere between inconvenient and devastating.
What isn’t different: Criticism is an opportunity to learn, as the same managers point out to employees when providing it in performance reviews.
For business leaders, reading and learning might not just be a better response to public criticism.
It might reduce it.
Well said. I consider the ability to openly criticize to be the mark of a healthy society.
Agreement with criticism is never required. Being able to discuss disagreement is essential to progress.
I also appreciate your distinction between trying to avoid offending anyone and deciding to not be offensive.
Bob,
Thank you for your rationality. We need more rational thinking like yours in such times, not inflammatory diatribes that do nothing more than make bad situations worse.
Wow. Amazing. A beacon of Sensibility!
I once worked for an organization that hired a person from a rival organization. While still fairly new, the employee became unhappy with something (I forget what) that was happening at work. His response was to try to organize his colleagues to make the whole organization aware of it and elicit their support. I guess this was how it was done where he came from. The boss called him in and calmly told him such behavior was not allowed, that if he had a problem he was to come to her or to his supervisor or to HR or to the grievance process of the larger organization, his choice, and then she let him have both barrels about not having come to her first, she having had a role in his hiring and he not having any reason to not do that. Then she waited until he spoke, and they discussed his grievance. He went out into his incited group and calmed them down–she told him to do that, he had stirred them up, she made getting them back on board his problem. Over time he has received two promotions and has become the contributor we expected when he was hired. Short version, if you have not tried to present your message internally first, try it. I personally believe that is your responsibility as an employee, but I realize not everyone agrees with me on this. Use the best of what you know about presenting information in the spirit of building — trust, the organization, whatever it takes. It is always easier to tear down than it is to build.
I agree – try to make the change first by persuading whoever needs to be persuaded.
Having said that, it’s still, in my view, important for managers to accept information no matter how it’s offered, even if the way it’s offered is inappropriate … for example from attempts to get co-workers on board in a dysfunctional way, or through social media postings.
As you demonstrated, even when it’s done in an inappropriate way, properly handled both the employee and the manager can find something to learn from the situation.
Another excellent article. Your point about managing difference and disagreement, along with diversity, I think are huge points, truly keys to success, but I suspect extremely difficult for a manager to acquire the necessary skills and self-discipline in a timely manner, given the different doing styles that people have.
Too often, I suspect, we learn what we needed to know how to do, after the time we needed it. Maybe you can write a book on how managers with different doing styles can manage difference and disagreement.
I appreciated this week’s article. The press in general is so much about sensationalism and seems to try to evoke public outcry, not as a means to positive change, but simply as a means to more sensational content.
I read every KJR article and appreciate most, though I rarely comment. Thank you for continuing to provide your thoughts. They are valuable input.
In your predictions column, you asked for feedback on your bog. Please continue, because I welcome your balanced views on IT and other matters. This column is a fine example of the latter. Just one small thing: there’s a typo in the title.
I hope to continue to read your blog for many years to come.
Thanks. And thanks for pointing out the typo. It’s now fixed.
Best article I’ve read on the subject.