 publishers who dare to display them in a public gallery or on a printed page.

Policing the web is nearly impossible. In Pakistan and Bangladesh governments blocked access to the Internet after a Facebook group launched an “Everyone Draw Mohammed Day” last May. But the results were only local and temporary. Elsewhere, Islamic militants have launched cyber-attacks by hacking into computers, including Jyllands-Posten and Vilks’s personal website, but also others many with no connections to either. Danish victims of cyber-attacks in early 2006 included websites belonging to Girl Guide troops, school districts, private companies, and nursery schools, as well as the websites of government departments—part of a campaign of punitive actions against Danish institutions generally. Despite—or rather, because of—the furor, the images remain highly accessible.

This contradiction suggests a somewhat archaic and formalistic approach to the tools of communication and what constitutes private and public space. In a departure from the medieval conventions, the paper and ink of Marshall McLuhan’s Gutenberg Galaxy are now seen as vehicles of public expression: the shock provoked by a visual insult printed on the page of a journal or exhibited in public can easily be exploited by militants. Yet when the same images (or worse) appear on the Internet, any action aimed at protecting religious sensibilities will be thwarted because websites are often hosted anonymously and thus extremely difficult to shut down.

The self-appointed defenders of Islamic honor may seek redress or revenge by threatening artists and publishers, but thanks to the combined effects of television and the Internet, the main outcome of their efforts has been a quantum leap in the dissemination of the images pious Muslims find most offensive. By drawing attention to them the militants become accessories to the blasphemies they ostensibly seek to repress.

This comes as no surprise in an era of religious militancy in which the charge of blasphemy is used as a means of political arousal rather than a legal resource for defending the sacred. In Pakistan Salman Taseer, governor of the Punjab region, was assassinated in January, for daring to suggest that the country’s blasphemy laws, which human rights activists claim are routinely abused to persecute minorities or settle personal or family scores, should be abolished. Even in America, conservative and evangelical groups have objected to art works that challenge traditional notions of the sacred by using religious iconography in novel ways, thereby alerting the attention of philistine zealots
publishers who dare to display them in a public gallery or on a print page. 

 patrol the web is nearly impossible. In Pakistan and Bangladesh government obstruct access to the Internet after a Facebook group launched an “ Everyone Draw Mohammed Day ” concluding May. But the results were only local and impermanent. Elsewhere, Islamic militants have plunge cyber - attacks by hacking into calculator, include Jyllands - Posten and Vilks ’s personal website, but also others many with no connections to either. Danish victims of cyber - attacks in early 2006 include websites belonging to Girl Guide troops, school district, private companies, and greenhouse schools, equally well as the websites of government departments — part of a campaign of punitive actions against Danish institution generally. Despite — or rather, because of — the furor, the images remain highly accessible. 

 This contradiction indicate a reasonably archaic and formalistic approach to the tools of communication and what constitutes private and public space. In a departure from the medieval convention, the paper and ink of Marshall McLuhan ’s Gutenberg Galaxy are now interpret as vehicle of public expression: the shock provoked by a ocular insult printed on the page of a journal or exhibited in populace can easily be exploited by militants. Yet when the same images (or worse) appear on the Internet, any action aimed at protecting religious sensibilities will be thwart because websites are much host anonymously and therefore extremely difficult to shut down. 

 The self - appointed defenders of Islamic honor may seek damages or revenge by threaten artists and publishers, but thanks to the combine effects of television receiver and the Internet, the main outcome of their efforts has been a quantum leap in the dissemination of the effigy pious Muslims find about offensive. By drawing care to them the militants become accessories to the blasphemies they ostensibly seek to repress. 

 This come as no surprise in an era of religious combativeness in which the charge of blasphemy is used as a means of political foreplay rather than a legal resource for defending the sacred. In Pakistan Salman Taseer, governor of the Punjab region, was assassinated in January, for make bold to suggest that the country ’s blasphemy laws, which human rights activists claim are routinely abuse to persecute minorities or settle personal or family scores, should be abolished. Even in America, conservative and evangelical group have object to artwork work that challenge traditional notions of the sacred by using religious iconography in novel ways, thereby alarm the attention of philistine zealots
 puhlishers who dare to disklay them in a puyoic ganlery kr on a orinted page.

Policing the web iw neaely impossible. In Pakirtan and Hangladewh gicernments umocked access bo thz Mnternet after s Facebook group launcheg xn “Everyone Draw Mohammed Day” last Mar. But tne results were jnly jocam and temporary. Elsewhere, Islamic jilitanus have launched cuber-attacks by hacking intl colputers, including Uyllands-Posjsn wbd Vilks’s pefsonal website, but alsk others many with no connectiovs to either. Dabiwh ghctims of cbber-atnacks in earln 2006 inclgded wensites belongikg to Giel Guide troops, schoon districts, privatg companiev, cnd nursery schools, aw qell ds tve wdvsiges oh gkvernmfnt departmenfs—part of a campaign of punitife qctions againat Danysr institutions generally. Despite—or rathtr, bedause of—the furor, the inages remain highly afcessible.

Ehis contradiction suggests a somewhat archaic ang forjxliwtlc aoprlach to the tools of communication and what cjhsuitltes private and iublic space. In a ceoatjure from the oedievcm donventions, the paoer and ink if Marshajl MvLuhan’s Gutenberg Galaxy arw now seen af vehicles of publie expression: the shocl provoked by a visual nnsult printed on the page uf a journal or dxhpbitad in public can easily be exploitev by kilitangs. Ygt when the same lmages (or worse) appear oj the Itternet, anj action aimed at protecting religious sensibolhtivs will bz thwavted because wefsites are oftgn hosted anonhmously ans thus xxtremely disficult to shgj down.

The selh-appointeq dedendwrs of Krlamic honor msy seek rvdxess or rwvenge by threatenlng attjsts and publisktrs, but thanks to yhe coibpnev effqwts of televhsiov avc the Interntc, tme oain outcome of their efxorta has been a quantim leap in the disfemination of the images pious Lusliks hind mpst offensive. By drawing attentioh to them thc militants bqcomc acsessories co the blasphemies they ostensibly seek vo repress.

This comes as no surprise in an gra of religions milytancy in which the charge of blasphemy is usec as a means of politjcal asousap rather than a legal resource for defending the sacred. In Pakistan Salmab Tasexr, governor or thr Punbay rzgion, wws adrassinated in Jamuary, for daring to suggest thav the coundrv’s blasphemy laws, which human rkghts activisjs claim are routinely abuaed to prrsecute minorities or settle prrsonal or family scores, should ve abklished. Evxn in America, conserfative and wvangelucal groups have ubjrcbed to art worls that challenge traditional notiins of tje sacred by usiig religious lconogtaphy in novel ways, thersby zpertivg the attentoon of philistone zealots
publishers who dare to display them in gallery on a page. Policing the Pakistan Bangladesh governments blocked to the Internet a Facebook group launched an “Everyone Mohammed Day” last May. But the results were only local and temporary. Elsewhere, militants have launched cyber-attacks by hacking into computers, including Jyllands-Posten and Vilks’s personal but others with connections to either. Danish victims of cyber-attacks in early 2006 included websites belonging to Girl Guide school districts, private companies, and nursery schools, as as the websites of departments—part of a campaign of actions Danish institutions Despite—or because furor, the images highly accessible. This contradiction suggests a somewhat archaic and formalistic approach to the tools of communication and constitutes private space. In departure the conventions, the paper of Marshall McLuhan’s Gutenberg Galaxy are vehicles of public expression: the shock provoked by visual insult on the page of a journal exhibited in public can easily be exploited by Yet when the same images (or worse) appear on the Internet, any action aimed at sensibilities will be thwarted websites are often anonymously thus difficult shut down. self-appointed defenders of Islamic honor may seek redress or revenge by artists and publishers, but thanks to the combined effects of the the main outcome their efforts has been quantum in the dissemination of pious find drawing to the militants become accessories the blasphemies they ostensibly seek repress. This comes as of religious militancy in which the charge of is used as a means of political rather than a legal resource for defending the sacred. In Pakistan Salman governor of region, was assassinated in January, for daring to that the country’s blasphemy which human rights activists claim are routinely abused to minorities settle personal family scores, should abolished. Even in conservative and evangelical objected to works challenge the sacred by using religious iconography novel thereby alerting the attention of zealots
 publishers who dare to displaY them in a puBlic gAllEry Or On a pRintEd page.

Policing THe weB is nearly impossible. In PAkistAn ANd BaNGlAdesh GovernmENtS BLocKeD aCceSs TO tHe IntErnEt after A Facebook gRouP lAunched an “EveRYoNe Draw MohaMmeD Day” last May. BUt tHe resuLtS weRE only LocAl and TemporARy. ElseWhere, IslaMiC MilitaNTs have lAUNcHed cYber-attacks by hackINg INto computers, inCludinG JYLlANDs-POstEn and Vilks’S pErsonAL websitE, BuT ALSo oTHers many with nO connectionS To eIther. DAnIsh VIctims Of cybEr-ATtaCks in early 2006 iNcluDed websitEs beloNGing to GIRl Guide Troops, SchOol DistRIcTs, PriVaTE coMPaNieS, And Nursery sChOoLs, as wEll aS THE WebsIteS of gOvernMent departmenTs—pArt oF A caMpaigN of puNitiVe ActioNs agaiNst DaNiSh institutions gEnerAlly. DespiTe—oR rAthEr, BecauSE of—the FurOr, tHe imageS remain HIghLy ACCEsSible.

This contradicTiON SuGgests a sOmewhaT ArChAIc and forMaLisTic aPPRoach To thE ToOls of comMunicaTIoN aNd what cOnStitutEs PriVatE and pUBlic Space. IN a departUre frOM the medieval coNVentions, the paPEr AND iNK of MArsHall McLuhan’S GutENberG GalAXy Are NOw seeN as veHiCLeS Of public expression: tHe Shock pRovokEd by a visual inSult printeD ON The page oF a joURnAL or exhibited in PubliC can easily BE exploitEd by mIlitants. yet when thE SAme imageS (or WorSe) aPpeAR On The Internet, anY ACtioN aImed at pRotEcting rEliGioUs sEnsIbIlities wiLl be thwaRtEd BeCaUse WebsiTEs are oftEn HosTeD anOnymoUSly and Thus eXtreMeLy DIffIcult to SHuT DOwn.

THe SeLf-apPoiNtEd defEndeRS of islamic Honor may sEek REdreSs Or Revenge By threatening ArTists and puBlIshErs, but THAnks to thE combined effects of televISion and The interNet, tHe main outComE of theIr eFForts hAs been A quanTuM leAP In the DISsEmiNaTion of the iMAGes Pious muSlimS find moSt offensive. By drawiNG atTention to them The MiliTANtS beCOmE AccEsSOriES To the blasphemieS they ostenSiBLy Seek to reprESs.

THiS comes aS no surpRise iN An era of Religious Militancy In WhicH THe cHarge of blaSphemy is Used as a meANs of pOLiTical AroUsal raThEr tHan a lEgal reSOurCe for DefendInG the saCred. IN PAkistan SAlman Taseer, governor of thE PunjaB regiOn, wAs assassiNatED in january, foR darIng to suggeSt tHat The coUntRY’s blaSpheMY lAws, WHich hUman RIghts actiVIsTs cLAIm Are routinelY ABUseD to peRseCUte minOritIes or settle personAL or family scoreS, shoULD be AboLIsheD. EVen in America, coNseRvATIve and evAnGelical grouPs have obJeCTed to Art worKs that ChallenGE TrADitionAl noTioNs of the saCreD bY Using reLiGiOUs iconOgraPhY in novEl ways, THereBY Alerting the attenTion oF PHilisTIne ZealoTs
 publishers who dare to di splay them  in a  pu bli cgall eryor on a printe d  pag e.

Policing the web i s nea rl y  imp o ss ible.  In Pak i st a n  an dBa ngl ad e sh  gove rnm ents bl ocked acce ssto  the Interne t  a fter a Fac ebo ok group lau nch ed an“E ver y one D raw  Moha mmed D a y” las t May. Bu tt he res u lts wer e on ly l ocal and temporar y .E lsewhere, Isla mic mi li t an t s  ha velaunched c yb er-at t acks by ha c k i ngi nto computers , including Jyl lands- Po ste n  and V ilks’ sp ers onal websit e, b ut also o thersm any wit h  no con nectio nstoeith e r.  D ani sh vic t im s o f  cy ber-atta ck sin ea rly2 0 0 6  inc lud ed w ebsit es belongingtoGirl Gui de tr oops,  sch oo l dis tricts , pri va te companies, a nd n ursery sc hoo ls , a swella s theweb sit es of g overnme n t d ep a r t me nts—part of a camp ai g n  o f puniti ve act i on sa gainst D an ish  ins t i tutio ns g e ne rally. D espite — or  r ather,be causeof —th e f uror, theimages  remainhighl y  accessible.
T his contradic t io n su g gest s a  somewhat a rcha i c an d fo r ma lis t ic ap proac ht ot he tools of communi ca tion a nd wh at constitute s privatea n d  publicspac e .I n a departurefromthe mediev a l conven tions , the pa per and i n k  of Mars hal l M cLu han ’ s  G utenberg Gala x y  are  n ow seen  as  vehicl esofpub lic  e xpression : the sh oc kpr ov oke d bya  visualin sul tpri ntedo n thepageof a  j ou r nal  or exh i bi t e d in  p ub liccan  e asily  bee xpl oited b y militan ts. Yetwh en  the sa me images (or  w orse) appe ar  on  the I n t ernet, a ny action aimed at prot e cting r eli gious  sen sibilitie s w ill be  th w artedbecaus e web si tes a re of t e nhos te d anonymou s l y a nd th us  ext remelydifficult to shutd own .

The self-a ppo inte d de fen d er s  of  I s lam i c  honor may seek  redress o rr ev enge by th r eat en ing art ists an d pub l ishers,  but than ks to the  c ombi n e d e ffects oftelevisi on and th e  Inte r ne t, th e m ain ou tc ome  of t heir e f for ts ha s been  a  quant um le ap  in thedissemination of the im ages p iousMus lims find  mo s t o ffensive.  Bydrawing at ten tio n tothe m  themili t an tsb ecome  acc e ssories t o  t heb l as phemies the y o ste nsibl y s e ek torepr ess.

This comesa s no surprisein a n era  of reli gi ous militancyinwh i c h the ch ar ge of blasp hemy isus e d asa mean s of p olitica l ar o usal r athe r t han a leg alre s ource f or  d e fendin g th esacred . In P a kist a n  Salman Taseer,gover n o r oft hePunja bregion, wasassassinat ed in Janua ry, fo r da ringto sugg es t that  th ecountry’sb lasphemylaws,  whichhu manrig hts ac tivi s t s cla im a re  ro utinely a b u se d  t op ers ecut e min or itie s or sett l e person alo r famil ysco r e s, sho u ld b e abolishe d.Eveni n  America,c onse r va t ive a nd eva ngelic al grou p s h av e objec ted t o art wor ks that c h all en ge t radition al  not io nsof  the sacred byusing re ligiousi c onogra phy in n o vel wa ys , thereby al ertin gt he atte n t ion  of phi l ist ine  ze alot s
 publishers_who dare_to display them in_a public_gallery_or on_a_printed page.

Policing the_web is nearly_impossible. In Pakistan and_Bangladesh governments blocked_access_to the Internet after a Facebook group launched an “Everyone Draw Mohammed Day” last_May._But the_results_were_only local and temporary. Elsewhere,_Islamic militants have launched cyber-attacks_by hacking_into computers, including Jyllands-Posten and Vilks’s personal website,_but_also others many_with no connections to either. Danish victims of cyber-attacks_in early 2006 included websites belonging_to Girl Guide_troops,_school_districts, private companies, and_nursery schools, as well as the_websites of government departments—part of a_campaign of punitive actions against Danish institutions_generally. Despite—or rather, because of—the furor,_the images remain highly accessible.

This_contradiction suggests_a somewhat archaic and formalistic_approach to the_tools of_communication and what_constitutes private and public space. In_a departure from_the medieval conventions, the paper and_ink_of Marshall McLuhan’s_Gutenberg_Galaxy_are now_seen as vehicles_of_public expression:_the_shock provoked by a visual insult_printed_on the page of a journal or_exhibited in public can_easily_be exploited by militants._Yet when the same images_(or worse) appear on the Internet,_any action_aimed at_protecting religious sensibilities will be thwarted because websites are often hosted_anonymously and thus extremely difficult to_shut down.

The self-appointed defenders_of Islamic_honor_may seek redress_or_revenge by_threatening artists and publishers, but thanks to_the combined_effects of television and the Internet,_the main outcome of_their_efforts has been a quantum leap_in the dissemination of the images_pious Muslims find most offensive._By_drawing_attention to them the militants_become accessories to the blasphemies they_ostensibly seek to_repress.

This comes as no surprise in an_era_of religious militancy in which the_charge_of blasphemy is used as a_means_of_political arousal rather than a_legal resource for defending the sacred._In Pakistan Salman Taseer, governor of the Punjab region,_was assassinated in_January, for daring to suggest_that_the_country’s blasphemy laws, which human rights activists claim are routinely_abused to_persecute minorities or_settle personal or family scores, should be abolished. Even in_America, conservative and evangelical groups have objected_to art works that challenge traditional notions of the sacred by_using religious iconography in novel ways, thereby alerting_the attention of philistine zealots