'Worst kind of hypocrite’: New York Times hammered for double-standard on art too 'offensive' to be shown

@nytimes Seriously, you KNOW exactly what EVERY thinking person in America is going to say about this, right?

— Matthew T. Genelin (@MattGenelin) June 29, 2015

The New York Times played it “safe” when it came to reproducing Charlie Hebdo cartoons:

“Out of respect to our readers, we have avoided those we felt were offensive”

—@NYTimes, on Charlie Hebdo cover https://t.co/ZKMyHQuKGe

— justturnright (@justturnright) June 29, 2015

The Times was reportedly the only top U.S. paper not to publish the Charlie Hebdo cover.

But when it comes to other religions, the standards aren’t quite as tight, apparently:

This portrait of Pope Benedict XVI is made out of 17,000 condoms http://t.co/eKWJGHzU1S

— The New York Times (@nytimes) June 29, 2015

Really?

Hey @MitchKSmith whatever happened to that NYT policy against showing offensive religious images? @nytimes https://t.co/jFDn4GsZ3K

— The Streeter (@thestreeter) June 29, 2015

That “policy” was obviously suspended for this particular piece of “art,” which is pictured in the NYT ArtsBeat section.

The giant double standard didn’t go unnoticed:

Times STILL won't reprint Charlie Hebdo cartoons. Catholics won't go Knights Templar on their hypocritical asses. https://t.co/AbZXUY9M2o

— IWantNothingHat (@Popehat) June 29, 2015

Recommended

'Absolute Legend': Man Mocks UCLA Anti-Israel Protestors (WATCH)

Amy

Advertisement

@thestreeter @jtLOL @MitchKSmith @nytimes Difference is the NYT is not afraid the Pope is not going to authorize murdering them.

— Tonya Vlasik (@lawgirl) June 29, 2015

https://twitter.com/BecketAdams/status/615612256735391744

The NYT is the worst kind of hypocrite. Almost as if Charlie Hebdo never happened… https://t.co/eeVVBeWKNC

— George (@NJSpeechGuy) June 29, 2015

So, it's ok to show offensive religious images again? You're just scared to offend ISLAM? @nytimes

— Jennifer Bossypants (@ajenable) June 29, 2015

https://twitter.com/RobProvince/status/615616541716029441
https://twitter.com/jrsalzman/status/615615838679384064

OMG! How many people were murdered because of it? I'm going with nonehttps://t.co/Ru0E6uUfcb

— Josh Earnst (@NotJoshEarnest) June 29, 2015

Can you hear that? It's the sound of nobody getting slaughtered over this… https://t.co/P8NBd73nCy

— NeoN: Automataster (@neontaster) June 29, 2015

https://twitter.com/davidjacksmith/status/615614693240143873

@nytimes I guess it's easy to be bold and edgy as an artist when you risk absolutely nothing by doing it. She faces retaliation from no one.

— Paterfamilias (@PaterFam27) June 29, 2015

This brave artist is brave in the face of… wait. Nothing will happen to him. He's completely safe. https://t.co/07MGGApMVD

— RBe (@RBPundit) June 29, 2015

Gauntlet = Thrown:

@nytimes Do the same to a Muslim leader

— Thankful Muppet Energy (Sunny) (@sunnyright) June 29, 2015

https://twitter.com/AdamMuir/status/615619869862690816

How about a portrait of #Mohammed made out of condoms? Would the Times show it? #Islam https://t.co/B19QHTnkmx

— Harold (@Nikk1066) June 29, 2015

Possibly some of the most rhetorical questions ever.