Ethics (UPB) and political cartoons for the Internet Age

[TheAuger]

Hi everyone!  

 

Recently, Stef mentioned Washington Post cartoonist Ann Telnaes in <i>The Truth About Ted Cruz</i> saying that she'd portrayed "Organ Grinder" Cruz's young daughters as little monkey stage props in his campaign.

 

<i>“There is an unspoken rule in editorial cartooning that a politician’s children are off-limits,” Telnaes admits. “People don’t get to choose their family members so obviously it’s unfair to ridicule kids for their parent’s behavior while in office or on the campaign trail- besides, they’re children. There are plenty of adults in the political world who act childish, so there is no need for an editorial cartoonist to target actual children.”</i>

 

http://www.breitbart.com/big-journalism/2015/12/22/ted-cruz-strikes-back-at-washington-post-cartoonist-for-mocking-his-daughters-theyre-out-of-your-league/

 

I'm an amateur political cartoonist, I'm wanting to create a Twitter feed for my work, and I'm wondering about any ethical limits lambasting the criminal political class and other public figures in the Internet Age.  Is there such a thing as slander/libel under UPB?

 

So, for example, there is a little known story about Marco Rubio’s 1990 arrest for underage drinking Miami Park (after hours) well-known to be a place for older gay men to cruise for gay prostitutes (Rubio would have been 18 at the time).

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/rubios-summer-of-90-an-arrest-then-newfound-purpose/2016/01/21/3582a72e-c04d-11e5-bcda-62a36b394160_story.html

 

It turns out, one of the two friends Rubio was arrested with was allegedly sued by the City of Miami in 2007 for running a gay porn studio out of a rental property he owned.  Rubio and this friend (Angel Barrios) were cash-strapped roommates in 1990.  This doesn’t prove anything, of course, and the police report doesn’t mention any illegal activity.

 

http://www.miamigov.com/cityattorney/docs/litigation/Litigation-Report-Dec-2011.pdf  (page 16, bottom)

 

Now then, political cartoons of the past appearing in newspapers had to conform to the editor/publishers standards.  But in the Internet Age, information can be exchanged without editorial filters (setting aside for a moment Twitter’s [and other social media’s] community standards for a moment).

 

Would it violate UPB to post a cartoon caricaturing Rubio as a gay prostitute based on these rumors?  I’m just wondering about the ethics.  What if the portrayal in a state of nudity or state of undress, possibly performing sex-acts?  How about portrayal of pornography, drug use, sexuality/sex acts, racism, etc. where there is little or no factual basis…(None of these things violate UPB insofar as I’m aware, but if used to trash a public figure’s reputation — would there be an ethical conflict?).  

 

I’m not really concerned with aesthetics here, either, just the ethical dimension.

 

Is there such a thing as slander/libel under UPB?

[jpahmad]

doesn't the word "slander" imply dishonesty on the part of the person who is doing the slandering?  I thought that "slander" was when someone says something about someone else that isn't true.  Otherwise, it wouldn't be slander, it would just be the truth.

[Will Torbald]

 

Would it violate UPB to post a cartoon caricaturing Rubio as a gay prostitute based on these rumors?  I’m just wondering about the ethics.  What if the portrayal in a state of nudity or state of undress, possibly performing sex-acts?  How about portrayal of pornography, drug use, sexuality/sex acts, racism, etc. where there is little or no factual basis…(None of these things violate UPB insofar as I’m aware, but if used to trash a public figure’s reputation — would there be an ethical conflict?).  

 

I’m not really concerned with aesthetics here, either, just the ethical dimension.

 

Is there such a thing as slander/libel under UPB?

 

 

I think slander remains in the negative aesthetical category as long as you don't profit from the lies. That is, if you slander a person, and you are directly taking money or some other commodity from your lie, then you could say that you have commited some kind of fraud or immoral transaction. But standing somewhere and calling a person stupid things isn't any merit to initiate self defense, which is what the line between ethics and aesthetics is.