Africartoons.com | News feed

Cartoons for Mandela Day

Africartoons — Sun, 18 Jul 2010 07:28:54 +0000

Iziko Slave Lodge has invited visitors to see the ground-breaking exhibition entitled Mandela – Leader; Comrade; Negotiator; Prisoner; and Statesman – for free on Sunday, 18 July, from 10:00 until 17:00, in celebration of International Mandela Day on the icon's birthday. Also exhibited is a collection of Zapiro cartoons about Mandela, entitled 'Drawing on Mandela'.

In 2009 the United Nations declared 18 July as International Mandela Day to honour the man whose vision surpassed the boundaries of time and history. This is the first time a day has been declared by the organisation to honour of a single person. July 18th also happens to be Mandela's 92nd birthday this year, as well as the 12th anniversary of his marriage to Graca Machel.

For more information about Iziko Education and Public Programmes’ activities, contact Wandile Goozen Kasibe on 021 481 3804, or email wkasibe@iziko.org.za, or Buntu Gwinta on 021 959 6794 or email GwintaB@cput.ac.za. For visitor enquiries relating to the Iziko Slave Lodge, call 021 460 8200.

Zakumi turns 16 on Youth Day

Africartoons — Thu, 17 Jun 2010 02:16:42 +0000

Helen Zille arrested for trademark infringement

Zakumi, the strange green-maned cartoon leopard that has landed the dream job of mascot for the 2010 Soccer World Cup, turned 16 yesterday, according to his Wikipedia entry. However he is far from being a 'sweet sixteen' year-old if stories doing the rounds are to be believed.

ZAKUMI's name is derived from the international abbreviation for South Africa (ZA) and "KUMI" (meaning ten in many African languages), as a reference to the year 2010.

He was born in 1994 on June 16th - a day celebrated as Youth Day in his native country in recognition of the contribution to democracy made by the youth of Soweto in 1976.

The Rastafarian lion/leopard hybrid celebrated his birthday by watching his national side lose 3 - 0, to Uruguay. The team also lost its goalkeeper, to a dodgy decision.

Andries Odendaal, a designer who lives in Cape Town, is believed to be Zakumi's natural parent and creator, although it is understood that FIFA adopted him in September 2008. The global football monopoly now owns Zakumi's name, image, spots... in fact everything that makes his very being.

Zakumi was always destined to become the 2010 Soccer World Cup mascot, according to his officially appointed biographers S Francis and Rico. They have recorded his path from humble beginnings to stardom in a series of nationally published cartoon strips sponsored by a large credit card brand.

Since his adoption and subsequent rise to fame, Zakumi's image and all associated intellectual property have been strongly protected by his title holders, who also own international rights to the colour orange, the year 2010, mini skirts, soccer, Table Mountain, South Africa, and the sky.

Unconfirmed reports have it that FIFA's Trademark Police arrested DA leader and Western Cape Premier Helen Zille in the early hours of this morning, for sporting a hairstyle similar to that of the World Cup mascot.

Approached for comment, a FIFA spokesperson would only say that "Zakumi® is a registered trademark™ of FIFA® which in turn is owned by SEPP BLATTER® who is answerable to nobody", but warned Africartoons not to quote them on this "because all statements made by FIFA® spokespersons were copyrighted© and as such may not be used, or repeated".

Zakumi joins a menagerie of FIFA owned mascots (pictured below), many of whom have not been seen since the final game of their respective World Cups. FIFA has strongly denied rumours that they have been sold to organ harvestors. They have also rebuked any suggestion that Zakumi merchandising has been subject to a dodgy tendering process, and then outsourced to foreign sweatshops.

But the governing body warned Africartoons not to publish these denials, because "all statements made by FIFA® spokespersons were copyrighted© and as such may not be used or repeated".

Zakumi's FIFA sanctoned motto is "Zakumi's game is Fair Play."

- Africartoons Reporter.

Cartoonists Get Behind the Soccer

Africartoons — Fri, 11 Jun 2010 10:09:49 +0000

Corrupt politicians, dodgy business persons and lazy public servants will all benefit from at least a partial reprieve from local cartoonists who have shifted their focus towards the Soccer World Cup, and joined the rest of South Africa in a mood of patriotic goodwill. From Andy, Brandan and Chip to Xaba, Yalo and Zapiro, South African cartoonists will be challenged to find a cynical angle as all seems to be on track just before the kick off.

The country is joined by the entire planet in a wave of positive sentiment - not usually a choice ingredient for editorial cartoons, but in this instance it seems that the cartoonists are prepared to make an exception.

Zapiro sets the tone with a cartoon imagining the impossible: Bafana Bafana winning the world cup! Madam & Eve creators Rico and Steve Francis have come to the party by allowing even their most sceptical character, Mother Anderson, to catch the World Cup fever, while Eve has been capitalising on all the entrepreneurial opportunities the event has on offer.

Nanda Soobben cleverly revives the theme of the rainbow nation by integrating the rainbow into Durban's magnificent Moses Mabhida stadium.

Jerm has kicked off with a series of vuvuzela blasts and insists that during the next month soccer will be a prevalent theme. Miles adds an elephant's trumpet to the orchestra of noise.

Yalo reports that the state president's office has changed his music-on-hold to vuvuzela bursts while the president is too busy (presumably watching soccer) to take calls.

Mama Taxi creators Gavin Thomson and Deni Brown have created a series of full page soccer themed strips for a supplement to the Afrikaans papers that carry their strip and leading caricaturist Maynderd Vosloo has prepared a series of caricatures of the tournament's biggest heroes. Bethuel Mangena has been commissioned to deliver a world cup themed cartoon for each edition of the 'Let's Go 2010' supplement to six titles in the Avusa Media group; kicking off (after the opening match) with the assertion that the Mexican flavour of football is "not that hot".

And so, a positive wind of change has taken over the national cartoon spaces - for the time being at least - like a vuvuzela blast of breath of fresh air.

Tap in and watch as the cartoons unfold daily here on Africartoons.com.

MAMA TAXI takes centre field at the Soccer World Cup.

Lampooning Religion

Africartoons — Mon, 07 Jun 2010 21:35:46 +0000

By Nathan Geffen

There are two questions to answer about Jonathan Shapiro’s cartoon of the Prophet Muhammed: (1) did he have a right to publish it and (2) should he have published it?

These two questions are often mixed up in discussions of freedom of expression. Many grotesque expressions, including much racism, are protected –their proponents have the legal right to express them– but these expressions are also rightly criticised as wrong.

The Equality Act describes the legal boundaries of freedom of expression. But some lawyers think its prohibitions are dubious and overbroad. The Constitution is the guarantor of rights in South Africa, so the first question can be answered by examining section 16. It only allows the legislature to prohibit certain kinds of expression such as propaganda for war or inciting imminent violence. Clearly Shapiro’s cartoon was neither of these. That leaves only one remaining ground. Expression may be prohibited if it incites hatred based on race, ethnicity, gender or religion and constitutes incitement to harm. [1]

Whatever you think of the cartoon, even if you think it is anti-Islam, it is very difficult to argue that a light-hearted comment on Muslim humour constitutes hatred for Muslims. Moreover it definitely does not incite harm against Muslims. Consequently there were no constitutional grounds for Shapiro being prevented from publishing it. Indeed, this is why last minute legal action by the Council of Muslim Theologians to stop its publication failed.

The first question is not a minor one. Many writers have vehemently criticised Zapiro’s cartoon. Some have been dogmatic Islamic fundamentalists, but some have been progressive Muslims or liberal thinkers. [2] Few of these antagonistic critiques of the cartoon have defended Shapiro’s right to publish it despite finding it offensive. This is not a minor omission, for in so doing they give succour to the intolerance of the Council of Muslim Theologians. [3]

The second question, should Shapiro have published, is a more complex and subjective one. Whether or not you think he should have published the cartoon depends not only on your religious beliefs, but what kind of cartoons you like and the degree to which you are nervous about a debate with the potential to turn violent. Before giving my answer, I want to point out some of the problems in a speech written by one of Shapiro’s critics, Mahmood Mamdani, that he delivered upon receiving an honourary doctorate at the University of Johannesburg. [4]

Mamdani is a respected scholar who has written a well-received book, Good Muslim, Bad Muslim, that criticises the way the Western world has dealt with Islam. Some respected progressive Muslim leaders have emailed Mamdani’s speech widely, apparently aligning themselves with its content. Much as many progressive Jews appear to suspend their critical thinking when it comes to Israeli crimes against humanity, so too it seems progressive Muslims have not taken cognisance of the flaws in Mamdani’s speech.

Mamdani compares Shapiro’s cartoon to the infamous Danish cartoons. But he fails to note that Shapiro depicted a sympathetic and likeable Muhammad, while several of the Danish cartoons depicted Muhammad as a terrorist. Mamdani distinguishes between blasphemy (which he appears to condone) and bigotry (which he doesn’t), where the former is what Muslims do when they criticise their establishment and the latter is apparently what non-Muslims like Shapiro and the Danish cartoonists do.

He writes, “Blasphemy is the practice of questioning a tradition from within. In contrast, bigotry is an assault on that tradition from the outside.” The effect of this is to discourage non-Muslims from criticising Islam. It is eerily similar, although not identical, to an argument I hear frequently from Zionists who ascribe any criticism of Israel to anti-semitism. Presumably then, it is only Shapiro’s Jewish birth that permits him to draw former Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon as a Nazi SS officer, and his “Western” cultural identity that affords him the right to draw the Pope in a condom as a comment on the Catholic contribution to the spread of HIV? No, the legitimacy of an argument is based on its logic, not the identity of its source.

Mamdani brings up Rwanda as an example of where free speech spurred on a genocide. It is absurd to imply that Shapiro’s cartoon is even vaguely analogous to radio DJs calling for Tutsis to be murdered.

But this is the most disturbing paragraph in Mamdani’s speech, “The colonizing discourse historically focused on barbarities among the colonized – sati, child marriage and polygamy in India, female genital mutilation and slavery in Africa – and presented colonialism as a rescue mission for women, children, and minorities, at the same time claiming to be a larger project to civilize majorities. Meanwhile, Western minorities lived in the colonies with privilege and impunity.”

This exemplifies ethical relativism. Undoubtedly Mamdani does not condone child marriage, female genital mutilation and slavery. But the context of his comment, with its emphasis on criticising western colonialism can only comfort those who do condone these evils. Moreover, I would be very surprised if Mamdani has any sympathy for the Muslim theocracies and their oppression of women and gays or the myriad of human rights abuses perpetrated daily and ubiquitously in the name of Islam. But there’s not a hint of criticism of these. In an article that bemoans western colonialism (which has been responsible for a great many human rights catastrophes) and welcomes the rise of India and China and their “significant Muslim minorities”, there’s not the slightest appreciation of the religious fascism epitomised by the Iranian government on the one hand and the Taliban and Al Qaeda on the other.

On the contrary, Mamdani’s unintentionally sinister comment, “I want to take this opportunity to reflect on times and places when humour turned deadly” fails to acknowledge that the only deadly threats emanating from Shapiro’s cartoon are those directed by Muslim fundamentalists against the Mail & Guardian and Shapiro.

Now to answer the second question. A valid criticism of Shapiro’s cartoon is that he chose to publish it in the context of the Everybody Draw Muhammed Day, a somewhat gratuitous event which was open to abuse by Islamaphobes. Nevertheless, there are several reasons for believing he should have drawn it, the timing aside. Shuaib Manjra [5] and Terry Bell [6] have offered various arguments in support. I offer one more.

Every day, but especially Sunday, on South African television, on radio and in newspapers, churches, synagogues and mosques theologians freely express their views and evangelise. More than occasionally they express views that are antagonistic against atheists, agnostics, the non-religious, other religions, women, people with HIV, people who have sex outside of marriage, people who have abortions, gays and the science of evolution. With few exceptions they express views of dubious rationality and scientific accuracy.

But religion is no longer the sacred untouchable it used to be. It has become acceptable, thankfully, to question, debate and criticise religious beliefs. Just as the religious have been free to criticise the non-religious, the opposite is now possible too.

I am an atheist (and a cultural Jew). Many religious beliefs are scientifically untenable. People have the right to hold these beliefs and I very seldom discourage anyone from their religious convictions. But I and my fellow atheists also have a right to question, criticise and even lampoon religious views for they have no special exemption from critique. It is my personal view that it is irrational to believe that it is sinful to depict the Prophet Muhammed. I therefore welcome a cartoon that playfully challenges this belief. It is one of the joys of living in a democracy that we have the freedom to lampoon religion. I don’t like Richard Dawkins’ tactless, humourless way of criticising religion, but Jonathan Shapiro’s light-hearted cartoon seems to me to be just the way to do it.

Finally, the Mail & Guardian’s public statement in the face of immense pressure (and death threats) that they will honour “the prohibition on representation of the prophet” compromises their independence. [7] It opens the gates to the polygamists, Africanists, Zionists and religious fundamentalists of all stripes to claim a deep injury, and insist that newspapers cease publishing uncomfortable views. That is a deeply worrying precedent that stifles freedom of expression. [8]

Footnotes

1. This is a bit simplistic. Defamation, false advertising and copyright infringement are also examples of unlawful expression, but these are not relevant to Shapiro’s cartoon.

2. To his credit, Jonathan Jansen criticised the cartoon, but did defend Shapiro’s right of expression. See Jansen, J. 2010. The Times. Being respectful is a choice. http://www.timeslive.co.za/opinion/columnists/article472250.ece/Being-re...

3. For the record, the Council had the right to try to stop Shapiro from publishing but in exercising that right they demonstrated their intolerance.

4. Mamdani, M. 2010. Beware Bigotry: Some thoughts on free speech and the Zapiro cartoons. Talk at University of Johannesburg on receiving honourary doctorate. http://www.mediareviewnet.com/index.php/201005271563/Exclusive-/Beware-B...

5. Manjra, S. 2010. Business Day. All power to Zapiro’s amusing pen.

http://www.businessday.co.za/articles/Content.aspx?id=109870

6. Bell, T. 2010. Mail & Guardian. Bigotry rides rampant. http://www.mg.co.za/article/2010-05-27-bigotry-rides-rampant

6. Mail & Guardian 2010. M&G statement on Prophet Muhammad cartoon. http://www.mg.co.za/article/2010-05-27-mg-statement-on-prophet-muhammad-...

7. I am grateful to Doron Isaacs for comments. I take sole responsibility for the content of this article.

WHO LET THE DOG OUT?

Africartoons — Mon, 07 Jun 2010 20:41:04 +0000

The guys behind Madam & Eve chase new markets

Stephen Francis & Rico Schacherl, creators of “Madam & Eve” have launched a new cartoon strip, aimed at the international market.

Fans of Madam & Eve need not worry, the duo fully intends to continue supplying a daily dose of SA's most popular strip. In fact, they are currently working on expanding the “Madam & Eve universe”….and are busy finishing a new animated pilot episode for a new TV series.

However, with Bad Dog, Francis & Schacherl have been setting their sights, focusing directly on the highly competitive international syndication market.

According to Francis - “One of Madam & Eve’s greatest strengths is that its so “South African”…..however, that can also be one of the cartoon strip’s great ‘weaknesses’ when it comes to international syndication.   For example, sometimes fan emails from overseas might say something like “Love today’s Madam & Eve. By the way….what’s a Mielie Lady?’

By keeping the new Bad Dog cartoon strip’s location non-specific to any city, state or country, the creators hope to broaden the strip’s appeal and increase chances of international syndication.

“Bad Dog can take place in Cape Town. Australia,   New Jersey or anywhere in the UK. We want the readers to feel like the Bad Dog characters may be living just down their own block.”

While a bit different than the ‘feel’ of the Madam & Eve cartoon, the creators promise that Bad Dog will still carry their inimitable style of humour and wackiness.

When asked to reveal a little bit about the direction of the new cartoon, Rico said:

“We don’t want to give too much away because we’re developing the characters as we go along. But we feel confident in describing the new cartoon strip at this point, as being….’about guy who owns a pet. Who’s….well, a bad dog.”

When Steve and Rico didn't send samples of their new strip to Africartoons, we went undercover and found it ourselves - to let the dog out of the bag, so to speak. And from what we've seen, our crit can be summed up in four words: "Bad Dog, good strip!"

The Doctor is 'Out' (for now)

Africartoons — Tue, 01 Jun 2010 09:57:44 +0000

By John Curtis

Dr Jack has drawn his final editorial cartoon for the Pretoria News, after a 17 year long relationship in which he has seen more editors come and go than he would care to remember.

Jack Swanepoel, who signs his work by the pen name "Dr Jack" is regarded by many as being South Africa's premier cartoonist (at least from an artistic point of view). Over the years he has built up an impressive portfolio of work as an illustrator, cartoonist and editorial cartoonist for such publications as The Sunday Times, Mail & Guardian, Noseweek and Farmer's Weekly - in fact he continues to draw for those last three publications - but it was with the Pretoria News that he first cut his teeth as an editorial cartoonist in 1993.

Jack co-created a strip called "Shoestring" in the nineties which launched in the Pretoria News and became widely syndicated in 14 newspaper titles across South Africa and in Namibia, culminating in the publishing of two collections. He has also published a series of "South African Byrd Books" and he continues to draw a sporting feature called "Lofty" for the Pretoria News twice a week.

Not wanting to be drawn into a discussion regarding the termination of his contract, Jack expressed his disappointment, but said he'd like to keep doors open rather than air his frustrations about the current editorship at the Pretoria News.

Africartoons has learned independently that the paper would ocassionaly elect not to run Jack's cartoons for reasons best known to themselves. The cartoons were quickly snapped up by other titles in the Independent group of newspapers. How the Pretoria News could not have realised the value of their cartoonist is beyond the comprehension of this writer.

Jack is already in discussions with a number of South African newspapers, but has said that he would rather find a position that wouldn't remove a sitting cartoonist. He remains an active cartoonist for other publications, and while he says he won't miss editorial cartooning for some time, he should be assured that South African editorial cartooning will miss him. Hopefully it won't be long before we see his editorial work again.

This is the latest in a long line of instances where local cartoonists have been summarily dismissed by their newspapers, often with scant regard to their rights. It is time that cartoonists gathered together to protect themselves against such actions. Africartoons has undertaken to initiate this, and invites all interested parties to contact the website to express their interest.

Moving a cartoon from the North Pole to Boulders

Africartoons — Tue, 01 Jun 2010 06:12:24 +0000

Gavin Thomson shares the thought process behind the creation of his latest cartoon .

First he had the cartoon set in the North Pole, with Bafana Bafana supporting Eskimos and penguins. "I liked the original idea because of the ridiculousness of someone going all that way out there to nick a pair of mirror socks.... that and the idea that an Eskimo would have them in the first place".

But he decided to move the set closer to home, Boulders, Simon's Town in fact. (MOUSE OVER THE CARTOON TO SEE THE REVISED VERSION).

Typical of most cartoonists, Gavin then doubted whether he had made the right decision. We think he did.

DOV FEDLER'S 'ZIBI' IS NO HAS BIN!

Africartoons — Sat, 29 May 2010 09:29:10 +0000

FAMOUS OSTRICH TAKES FLIGHT ONCE MORE

ZIBI, the litter busting ostrich created by cartoonist Dov Fedler in 1979 to inspire a nation to “Zappit in the Zibi Bin”, has been brought out of retirement by the City of Cape Town in a 3 year rights deal with the cartoonist, and with an option to extend the flightless bird’s contract even further.

An online research exercise found that people who remembered the “Keep South Africa Beautiful” campaign in the 1980s recalled nostalgically how “Zibi induced life-long anti littering sentiments and habits,” and the overwhelming majority of respondents to a survey called for the bird to come out of retirement to tackle litter once again. An internet search by Africartoons found the web littered (oops!) with fond memories and references to South Africa’s - if not the world’s - most famous ostrich.

The City has calculated that it costs ten times as much to collect litter off the ground than it does to collect it from bins, and so in a R7 million exercise, it is to install 10 000 single “Zibi-Bins" around the City, and embark on an extensive campaign to get people to use them. In addition to these bins, thousands of dual bins (with one side catering for recycling) will be installed at fan parks, fan walks and other high pedestrian traffic areas in time for the Soccer World Cup. Dressed in patriotic yellow and green sweater and socks, Zibi looked up to the task at a launch in Cape Town this week.

Dov Fedler, whose editorial cartoons are syndicated nationally in the Independent Newspaper titles, has been in the trade since 1961. When Africartoons asked him how he felt about the relaunch of his iconic creation, Fedler said; “After trying to revive Zibi on numerous occasions, I thought that he was finally buried in the sand. It’s gratifying to see him pop up again!” The cartoonist thanked Claire McKinnon and her team at the City of Cape Town for bringing Zibi back to life.

ZAPIRO ON THE COUCH

Africartoons — Fri, 28 May 2010 01:33:03 +0000

BY JOHN CURTIS

The Mail & Guardian Online has released a teaser to Zapiro’s much anticipated response to the criticism he and the newspaper have received since the publication last week of a cartoon depicting the prophet Muhammad.

After the uproar that followed, the cartoonist and the newspaper’s editor, Nic Dawes, met with representatives from the offended Muslim community to discuss their concerns. Subsequently the M&G expressed its regret for the offense caused by the cartoon and agreed to review its policy on religion. Until such time as the review is complete, the paper has undertaken not to depict the prophet again.

However Zapiro has declined to comment on the matter, saying that his response will take the form of a cartoon in the next edition of the newspaper.

The teaser shows that in a sequel to the Muhammad cartoon, the cartoonist has replaced the prophet on the psychiatrist’s couch. “Tough week?” asks the same psychiatrist. "You have NO idea!” responds Zapiro in the first frame of a rough draft of the multi panel cartoon.

The full cartoon will be published in the Mail & Guardian on Friday morning, and can be viewed on their site (and hopefully ours) later in the day. The newspaper has also published a special report online of the cartoon and the controversy it has brought.

9 am UPDATE: The full cartoon is now up on our site and can be viewed here.

"ZAPIRO CARTOON IS ABOUT PROFITS (NOT PROPHETS)"

Africartoons — Mon, 24 May 2010 20:35:45 +0000

BY DAVID BULLARD (for newstime)

Last week Zapiro, South Africa’s most publicity hungry cartoonist, drew a cartoon of the Prophet Mohammed (peace be upon him). Predictably there was an outcry and there have apparently been death threats aimed at the editor of the Mail and Guardian and the cartoonist. Both claim that this is all about freedom of speech but it isn’t and let me tell you why.

The cartoon was apparently drawn because someone decreed that last Thursday should be “Draw the prophet Mohammed day”. That in itself is an obviously inflammatory action because the furore the followed the Danish cartoons of the prophet several years ago made it perfectly clear that many devout muslims don’t like their prophet depicted as a cartoon figure. So to deliberately annoy a large group of people by suggesting that we do something they don’t like is particularly insensitive. Why not just call it “piss off a humourless muslim day”? By drawing the cartoon in the M&G Zapiro has effectively said to muslims that he doesn’t give a rat’s arse about their sensibilities. That, at least, is the interpretation of many.

It’s too glib to dismiss this and say that muslims should get a sense of humour. I’m sure many muslims do have a sense of humour but it’s arrogant to assume that a sense of humour should extend to the deliberate mocking of their religion by someone from another religion. Knowing the situation Zapiro was plain dumb to draw that cartoon and Nic Dawes showed a lack of judgment in my opinion by running it. On the pure press freedom argument of course we should be allowed to do such things but there are greater issues at the moment that argue against that.

We are about to host the FIFA World Cup and last week there was a story that Al Qaeda had plans to launch a terrorist attack on stadiums. So how clever is it to run a cartoon so near to the World Cup which any idiot knows will antagonize muslims? And what about the safety of the people who work at the Mail and Guardian and of the paper’s neighbours (of which I am one). If (heaven forbid) their offices were to be bombed by some deeply offended extremist will the twisted, bleeding bodies of innocent M&G staff have been worth the sacrifice in the name of press freedom? I don’t believe so.

So why did Zapiro draw a not particularly funny cartoon of the prophet Mohammed (peace be upon him) talking to what is obviously a Jewish psychiatrist up in heaven? Did he do it to deliberately upset muslims? Did he do it to point out that the prophet is no big deal and in need of psychiatric help? I don’t believe he did and I don’t believe Nic Dawes (the M&G editor) ran the cartoon with that purpose in mind. They did it for the money.

It’s well known that newspapers are floundering and losing ground to innovative and dynamic websites like Newstime. So every once in a while they have to come up with a publicity stunt to sell papers. One of the more recent was the announcement that Julius Malema had R51 million in his bank account and was being funded by someone. Have you seen anything to substantiate that claim in the past few weeks in any of the newspapers? No….neither have I.

The ill judged Zapiro cartoon is more about profits than prophets. If more people went out and bought the M&G last Friday a sub editor’s job might be saved. But more importantly, it gets people talking about how brave Zapiro is and don’t we newspaper people love our egos to be inflated? Unfortunately cheap publicity stunts do occasionally go horribly wrong and this seems to be a good example of that. Bearing in mind the deep offence caused it might be advisable for both Zapiro and Dawes to eat humble pie on this one, offer a groveling apology and make a substantial donation to a worthy muslim cause.

David Bullard writes for www.newstime.co.za