The Jan. 7 murder of editors, writers and cartoonists at the French satirical newspaper "Charlie Hebdo" is beyond reprehensible.

The violent response of Islamic terrorists to a cartoon of their prophet printed in that newspaper is just another example of the barbarism shown by those intolerant of the ideas of others.

That being said, and having worked in the news industry, specifically for community newspapers, for some 18 years, I know with freedom of the press and speech comes a heavy responsibility.

Embarrass or demean someone or a group, and the phones will ring and emails will flood the inbox.

We editors at The Lehigh Valley Press often agonize over running a photo or story in one of the weekly papers, asking each other what purpose it would serve.

Did "Charlie Hebdo" have the right to run the cartoon mocking the Prophet Muhammad? Yes.

Should the paper have run the cartoon? I say no.

If a member of a particular group, religion or nationality wants to make fun of his or her associates or beliefs, I say, no problem.

I feel free, due to my heritage, to comment on some of the silly traditions Italians have, such as making the sign of the horns to keep away evil spirits and bad luck when a baby is born.

Would I do the same with another nationality? No.

Why tweak the nose of a group everyone knows will respond with violence, unless you are willing to face the consequences?

What purpose was served by running the cartoon?

A truthful and unbiased news story would have had more legitimacy and would have been more easily defended.

A week later, "Charlie Hebdo" published another derogatory cartoon of the Prophet Muhammad.

Should the paper have run the second cartoon? I say yes.

Just as One World Trade Center, (Freedom Tower) and the National Sept. 11 Memorial and Museum in New York City have risen in defiance from the ashes of the 9/11 terrorist attacks on America, so has "Charlie Hebdo."

Deb Palmieri

editor

Parkland Press

Northwestern Press