LNAT Sample Essay-The Danish cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed should never have been published. DYA?

In 2005, the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten published 12 editorial cartoons of Prophet Mohammed, the principal figure in the Islamic religion. Whilst the cartoons promote freedom of expression, I agree that they should never have been published because of the ill intentions of inciting hostility towards a religious group, as well as the ramifications of increasing tensions in the country.

First off, the cartoons should have never been published due to their intentions, whereby the newspaper wished to incite hostility towards Islams. The publication is outrightly disrespecting the Islamic group of Denmark by going against their religious beliefs and rituals. In Islamic culture, any depictions or illustrations of the Prophet is disallowed, let alone the newspapers’ act of drawing a satirical artwork of the holy figure. Critics will however posit that how the cartoons are being interpreted is subjective, and that the authors or non-muslims might not have found the cartoons insulting but rather an illustration of their opinions towards Prophet Muhammed. That said, it must be recognised that the publishers evidently understand that by releasing such cartoons, it would definitely lead to backlash by the targeted minority Islams, which ultimately serves no benefit to society objectively. As such, the cartoons should still not have been posted.

Furthermore, the ramifications of increasing tensions in the country between racial groups serves as proof as to the damage caused by the cartoons. The act aimed towards the Islamic groups culminates into an intense conflict engendering between the minority and the majority racial groups in Denmark. In today’s world whereby racial diversity and harmony is increasingly emphasised, such an act which exacerbates racial fault lines in Denmark is unbecoming of a cohesive country. Such tensions are often long-lasting and can never be fully reversed, as the lingering hostility will persist well over time. The publication being of ill nature here and threatening the country’s status quo serves as a reason why it should in fact not be published in the first place.

Those who support the publication however argue that there are no issues with the cartoons, as it promotes freedom of expression in the press. Freedom of expression should be granted in today’s modern society, whereby an individual or the press should have the right to publish or post whatever content they wish to do. Restricting the ability to publish the cartoons would be violating that fundamental right and would not be appropriate in a democratic society. However, such a view is untenable as there must still be a certain level of regulation for publications and content being posted by the media, in light of preserving social cohesion and stability. For example, Singapore, a democratic country, allows for freedom of expression but has enforced legislations that ensure whatever content circulating in the media which might incite or invoke hate speech or racist remarks would be flagged up and taken down. This allows for a more peaceful and cohesive country, which I believe would serve a country better than having no media regulations at all.

In the grand scheme of things, it would serve society best were the cartoons of Prophet Mohammed completely not been published in the first place, in light of the disrespectful intentions as well as the irreversible ramifications of hostility resulting in the country.

Word Count: 565

#LNAT #Essay #UCAS