Cartoons Spark Press Freedom Debate in France LONDON - Press freedom or provocation? That was the question preoccupying France as a satirical weekly went ahead on Wednesday with a decision to publish cartoons featuring the Prophet Muhammad. The latest edition of Charlie Hebdo hit the streets after a week of sometimes violent demonstrations in the Muslim world provoked by an internet video seen as insulting Islam. The French government and a senior Muslim leader called for calm, while, as my colleague Nicola Clark reported, the foreign minister announced that, as a precaution, France planned to close its embassies in 20 countries on Friday, the Muslim day of prayer, which has become an occasion for many to express their anger although no threats have been made. The affair is likely to fuel a debate over whether the right of freedom of expression is absolute or whether publishers and others should first consider the possible consequences of their actions. European publishers are already more constrained than their American counterparts, as Nick Cohen, a British commentator noted this week. His conclusion was, "The friends of freedom should not make exceptions because freedom's enemies never do." Others have argued, in the United States and elsewhere, that offensive publications, such as the Innocence of Muslims video, go beyond the limits of free speech. As the latest edition of the French weekly flew off the newsstands on Wednesday morning, an avalanche of comment on social media reflected both sides of the debate. Anthony Cortes echoed a widely expressed view that publishing caricatures of the Prophet in the present context was "childish and stupid": Yves Finance, one of more than 2,000 people who posted comments on Charlie Hebdo's Facebook page, was among those who believed "press freedom is not negotiable." Others suggested the weekly was cynically pursuing free publicity and sales. "Citing freedom of expression and the press as a marketing exercise makes me want to throw up," Jérôme Dumont posted on Twitter. With the French government caught in the middle of a debate that involves defending press freedom on one hand and the need to maintain public order on the other, Jean-Marc Ayrault, the prime minister, insisted France was a country where freedom of expression was guaranteed. If anyone felt offended they could turn to the law. Laurent Fabius, France's foreign minister, took a similar line on press freedom. However, he also questioned whether, amid heightened emotions in the Muslim world over an "imbecilic and absurd" video, it was smart to pour oil on the fire. Charlie Hebdo was unrepentant, with Stéphane Charbonnier , the weekly's publisher also known as Charb, saying it was just the sort of thing the weekly had been doing for the past 20 years. The weekly's offices were firebombed last November after it published a spoof issue "guest edited" by the Prophet Muhammad to salute the victory of an Islamist party in Tunisian elections. Mr. Charbonnier told an interviewer, "I'm not asking devout Muslims to read Charlie Hebdo, any more than I would go to a mosque to hear a sermon that went against my beliefs." He said any protests that publication of the cartoons provoked would be because the weekly had leapt off the newsstands and on to the Internet. He might have spoken too soon. Charlie Hebdo's site was inaccessible on Wednesday's morning. Too many visitors or a hack attack? The French media had no immediate answer. Is freedom of expression sacrosanct or should publishers be prepared to censor themselves in order not to inflame an already tense situation?