In a study about political cartoons and their role in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, social researcher Ilan Danjoux concluded that cartoons have no power to predict events. But he did discover that they are accurate gauges of public opinion; they chronicle events, not neccesarily in terms of facts, but in terms of opinions.
For the last week, our newsroom has been flooding with cartoons about the events in Egypt. The issue has sparked a battle of opinions, with some clear fault lines. In this post, we identify the major divisions by looking at the cartoons that have been sent to us.
Because of the complexity of what's happening, and the difficulty of getting straight facts, a lot of international cartoonists are limiting themselves to commenting on the bloodshed in general, lamenting all the lives that are lost without clearly pointing out who is to blame:
Other cartoonists condemn the role of the military, This perspective seems to be in line with global public opinion, where most countries have strongly condemned the agression used by the army against the pro-Morsi protesters:
ther cartoonists blame the US for continuing to back the military.
Someone commented on a Egypt-cartoon on our Facebook page: '[This is] a solemn reminder that editorial cartoons, like any other media, can be skewed to benefit a particular political belief.' At Cartoon Movement, we believe that cartoons are by their very nature opinions. We also think that if you see enough opinions on any given issue, you get a well-rounded view. But in the case of Egypt, the cartoons do not contribute to a greater clarity; instead they reflect the reality: confusing, muddled, complex and uncertain.