Interesting article on Gawker about the background, history and tussle over the depiction of Prophet Muhammad in the Wikipedia entry:
Should Wikipedia Depict Muhammad?
Most of the debate has posited free speech versus sensitivity to religious teachings (particularly of the other), but there is a third way (most debates are not the false binary presented by politicians and media). Newspapers, journalistic organizations, universities, encyclopedias, history books, etc. all strive to present facts. A fact is something that is verifiably true. If it cannot be proven true, then it should not be presented as true. Yet, these same fact-reporting entities use illustrations, paintings and other artistic representations as a placeholder for an unknowable truth. One obvious example is the blue-eyed, blond-haired Jesus that has been portrayed as such in countless media representations through the centuries. But let’s move away from depictions of religious figures for the moment to a momentous historical one.
Christopher Columbus is one of the most well-known figures of history, yet we have no idea how he truly appeared. The paintings we see of him in books and news media were made after his death. If you check history textbooks in Spain, he appears in illustration as a Spanish caballero, and in Italy as a Genoan noble. The truth is absolutely nobody knows what he truly looked like, yet his image is ostensibly and tacitly posted as fact such as Wikipedia, history texts, newspapers, etc. (Not only do we not know what Columbus looked like, we do not even know if he was Italian, or really much of his life. Most of the myth of Columbus was fabricated by the American author Washington Irving in the 19th century to sell his books). It would be fine to put these images into entries and discussions of artistic representation of historic figures, but it is wholly inaccurate to put them into any document that purports to be truth. And that is why Wikipedia and other media organizations that purportedly pursue truth should not publish images of Muhammad or any religious/historical figure for which we have no accurate visual depiction. To do otherwise is simply wrong (not necessarily in the ethical or moral sense, but in the sense of simply being flat-out wrong).
Originally posted: http://www.mccarthyism.com/2015/20150127.htm
mccarthyism.com 