{"id":27444,"date":"2015-09-24T18:05:50","date_gmt":"2015-09-24T16:05:50","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.reunion68.se\/?p=27444"},"modified":"2015-09-22T06:29:10","modified_gmt":"2015-09-22T04:29:10","slug":"27444","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.reunion68.se\/?p=27444","title":{"rendered":"The Jewish Problem at The New York Times"},"content":{"rendered":"
\"\"<\/a>The Jewish Problem at The New York Times<\/a><\/strong><\/span><\/h5>\n

Jerold Auerbach<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

Office of The New York Times,
\nin New York City. Photo: WikiCommons.<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n

\"OfficeThe depths of the Jewish problem at The New York Times were glaringly exposed last week, when it published a chart identifying the Jewishness of congressional Democrats who opposed President Obama\u2019s Iran surrender and providing the estimated Jewish population of their districts. Its antisemitic insinuation \u2014 that the primary loyalty of American lawmakers, as dictated by their Jewish constituents, is to Israel \u2014 prompted a well-deserved cascade of criticism.<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

The Times\u2019s response to the outrage the September 10 publication elicited was as revealing as the article itself. Its disclaimer conceded only that the published chart \u201coversimplified a complex aspect of the debate.\u201d Asserting that \u201cthe positions of Jewish members of Congress . . . were a legitimate subject for reporting,\u201d it indicated that \u201cunder Times standards the religion or ethnicity of someone in the news can be noted\u201d \u2014 but only \u201cif that fact is relevant and the relevance is clear to readers.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

Judging by the outcry that ensued, the Times failed its own test. Will it now identify President Obama as the son of a Muslim father whenever his advocacy of the nuclear deal is discussed?<\/span><\/p>\n

The Times was only prepared to acknowledge that its odious chart did not \u201cmake clear that Jewish voters and lawmakers, like other Americans, were sharply divided on the issue.\u201d But noting the barrage of criticism it elicited, \u201cTimes editors agreed and decided to revise it,\u201d by removing the column indicating which opponents to the deal were Jewish. It also published a correction noting that the Times had misstated \u2013 by nearly doubling \u2013 the number of Democratic opponents who are Jewish. So much for atonement.<\/span><\/p>\n

ADVERTISEMENT<\/span><\/p>\n

Deputy Washington editor Jonathan Weisman, who claimed responsibility for the article, confessed to being \u201cshocked\u201d by the response. Belligerently defensive, he hastened to add that he is \u201cnot a self-hating Jew.\u201d He defended the graphic as \u201cinformative.\u201d But even Times Public Editor Margaret Sullivan conceded that the graphic was \u201cinsensitive and inappropriate.\u201d Indeed, she added, it was \u201cregrettably tone-deaf.\u201d Nonetheless, she commended Times editors for taking \u201cthe right action in listening to the objections and changing it.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

To be sure, the Times had the decency to remove the yellow underlining of Jewish members of Congress, which reminded more than a few outraged readers of the yellow stars the Nazis required be worn by Jews to identify them. One wondered, \u201cWhen did publishing lists of Jews come back into style?\u201d Another responded: \u201cI guess we should be grateful the New York Times chose not to illustrate its Jew tracker by awarding a six-pointed yellow Jewish badge to every Jewish opponent\u201d of the Iran deal.<\/span><\/p>\n

Apprehension over dual loyalty has haunted the Times ever since Adolph Ochs became its first Jewish publisher within months of the publication of Theodor Herzl\u2019s appeal for Jewish statehood. Ochs\u2019s embrace of Reform Judaism expressed religious conviction no less than the abiding fear that Jews might be judged guilty of dual loyalty if they identified with Zionism. His son-in-law and successor, Arthur Hays Sulzberger, who launched the family dynasty that still publishes the Times, was a stanch anti-Zionist during the Nazi era, who outspokenly opposed Jewish statehood lest American Jews be accused of divided loyalty.<\/span><\/p>\n

But as its listing of Jewish lawmakers suggests, the Times remains imprisoned by the same apprehension over divided loyalty that has framed its policy on Zionism for nearly 120 years. That, of course, is a not an insignificant Biblical number (Genesis 6:3). But its recent blunder into one of the hoariest antisemitic stereotypes suggests that its uneasiness about Zionism and Israel, apprehension over dual loyalty and evident cluelessness about its own bias may still have a long life ahead.<\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\"avatar\"Jerold S. Auerbach<\/strong> is the author of ten books, including Unequal Justice: Lawyers and Social Change in Modern America (1976), a New York Times Noteworthy Book; Justice Without Law? (1983); Rabbis and Lawyers: The Journey From Torah to Constitution (1990, 2010); Jacob’s Voices: Reflections of a Wandering American Jew (1996, 2010); Are We One? Jewish Identity in the United States and Israel (2001); Explorers in Eden: Pueblo Indians and the Promised Land (2006); Hebron Jews: Memory and Conflict in the Land of Israel (2009); Brothers at War: Israel and the Tragedy of the Altalena (2011); and Against the Grain: A Historian’s Journey (2012). His articles have appeared in the Wall Street Journal, Commentary, Harper’s, The New York Times, Jerusalem Post, Forward, The Jewish Press and American Thinker. Auerbach has been a Guggenheim Fellow, Fulbright Lecturer at Tel Aviv University, recipient of two College Teachers Fellowships from the National Endowment for the Humanities, and Visiting Scholar at the Harvard Law School. He is Professor Emeritus of History at Wellesley College.<\/span><\/em><\/p>\n

\n
\n
\n
\n

twoje uwagi, linki, wlasne artykuly, lub wiadomosci przeslij do: webmaster@reunion68.com<\/a><\/span><\/span><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The Jewish Problem at The New York Times Jerold Auerbach Office of The New York Times, in New York City. Photo: WikiCommons. The depths of the Jewish problem at The New York Times were glaringly exposed last week, when it published a chart identifying the Jewishness of congressional Democrats who opposed President Obama\u2019s Iran surrender […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[6],"tags":[26,24],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.reunion68.se\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/27444"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.reunion68.se\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.reunion68.se\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.reunion68.se\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.reunion68.se\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=27444"}],"version-history":[{"count":14,"href":"https:\/\/www.reunion68.se\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/27444\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":27448,"href":"https:\/\/www.reunion68.se\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/27444\/revisions\/27448"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.reunion68.se\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=27444"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.reunion68.se\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=27444"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.reunion68.se\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=27444"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}