Mark Steel in The Independent
To start with, we should
congratulate the Prime Minister of Israel
and ambassador for Saudi
Arabia , for honouring satire in its time of
need, by turning up to a march for free speech and against violence and murder.
Across Gaza , people must have sat in the rubble that
used to be their living room or local hospital and said: “Fair play to
Netanyahu, at least he knows how to have a laugh.”
And Raif Badawi will
appreciate the Saudi government’s presence on a day for free speech, because
he’s been sentenced to one thousand lashes by the Saudi government for setting
up a liberal website. They must be lashing him for not being critical enough I
suppose.
If the Saudis were really
imaginative they could have taken Badawi to Paris , and dragged him through the streets on
the march. His screams as his lacerated back bounced over the cobbles at Place
de la Concorde would have made a marvellous satirical statement.
Or it’s possible the famous
phrase that, “I don’t like what you say but will defend your right to say it,”
gets lost in translation to the Arabic, and comes out as, “I may disagree with
what you say, in which case I’ll strap you to a stick and rip your skin off”.
Presumably the judge said to him: “Your website shouldn’t just be liberal, it
should show cartoons of the King riding around on a pig at the very least. Take
off your shirt.”
It was also cheery to see
Sergei Lavrov, Putin’s foreign minister, having a giggle by showing up. Because
the first thing you think whenever you see Putin is how much he loves it when
journalists take the piss out of him.
“Make my nose more grotesque,
I’m not hideous enough,” he shouts at legions of cartoonists employed to mock
him. And he was genuinely angered by the shootings in Paris , because he’s adamant that critics in
the press should be poisoned, not shot, as it’s much less messy.
Alongside the Russian was
Sameh Shoukry, foreign minister for Egypt , where his government has
jailed Al Jazeera’s journalists. What a good sport Shoukry was, prepared to
send himself up by marching for free speech, hopefully with a placard saying:
“Je suis Al Jazeera.”
Because everyone agrees it’s
essential to allow things to be broadcast, even if we don’t like them.
Newspapers such as The Sun and the Daily Mail have been especially passionate
about this issue, which must explain why they’ve never criticised the BBC or
Channel 4 for showing anything too sexual; or with swearing; or critical of the
Royal Family.
They were particularly
animated a few years ago after Russell Brand’s unpleasant prank with an
answerphone. I don’t recall what they said exactly, but presumably it must have
been: “We may not agree with it, but we defend to the death the right to
broadcast whatever message he left.”
Satire, The Sun has insisted
all week, is an essential part of our democracy because it mocks the powerful.
That’s why they’ve always taken the side of the common person, and happily sent
up important figures, such as newspaper owners, as in that biting sketch where
the head of a media empire suddenly forgets everything he’s ever done when he’s
in front of a phone-hacking inquiry.
“It’s essential to allow
satire to puncture those in charge,” agree those in charge. So David Cameron
and the Mail would love it if an act at the Royal Variety performance did a
sketch called Benefits
Palace , featuring all the
royals screaming it was their right to live off the state. “What a splendid
example of our freedom of speech,” they’d all declare.
They’re all resolute that any
religion should be able to take a joke, which it undoubtedly should. So now’s
the time to make a situation comedy called A History of the Vatican, in which
Jimmy Savile is elected Pope because he’s the best at covering up child abuse.
“A tour de force, simply delightful,” would be the review in The Times.
Similarly, during one spate
of bombing in Gaza ,
when this newspaper printed a cartoon of the Israeli leader Ariel Sharon eating
babies, the Israeli embassy made an official objection to the Press Complaints
Commission. The Israeli government appears more concerned than anyone with the
right to publish cartoons, so I’m sure if you look back at the records, you’ll
find their complaint was that the cartoon should have been much more vicious.
Because you can’t put a price on the right to publish satire.
This is why there should only
be one regret about the choice of personnel to lead the march for peace and
freedom of speech. The ultimate satire would have been for the final speaker to
have been a representative from al-Qaeda. He could have come on as a surprise
guest and begun, “We sent the gunmen, but we thought we’d like to be here
anyway”, to rapturous applause, as everyone fell about laughing at the
wonderful satire of the absurdity on display.
And it would be easy to film
the whole show and put it out as a DVD – jihadists seem quite adept at
organising that side of things already.