Although the NYT could make it as a bird cage liner, I chose not to continue subscribing even for that purpose. I figured that if I continued the subscription, I’d have to buy a bird and I really don’t like to see a bird (or animal) caged…..
And, speaking of a bird, I hope this particular blog is seen as one to the The NYT.
On December 8, 2020, Liel Leibowitz wrote an article for Tablet Magazine, pointing out the personal, unbalanced piece, blessed by The NYT, of Sarah Pragar on the death of Chanukah in her house. Ms. Prager’s family decision not to celebrate Chanukah is fine. She has every right to her opinion and choice.
However, when a personal view on the death of Chanukah in one person’s household….as if it’s news of a happy death, the best thing since sliced bread…or gingerbread in this instance…. is written in The NYT, without a contrary view of the same holiday, the personal view carries much more weight, than if it were said over the back fence to a neighbor.
My initial thought on the publication of that piece, without its counterpart, is that the NYT would never, in a million editions, have run an anti Christian, anti Muslim or anti Kwanza article, without co running a countervailing article to show how fair the rag is.
Despite proudly touting itself as a paragon of virtuous publishing, the anti Semitic leanings (falling all over the floor is really a more apt description) make it a disgrace to professional journalism.
This is the paper that…
shunned any meaningful reporting of the Holocaust, which -if reported truthfully- might have helped to stop the pillage, rape, and slaughter in its tracks (excuse the pun but when I think of tracks, I think of cattle cars to the concentration camps) or -at the very least- to have stopped it earlier than after six million Jews and millions of homosexuals, disabled, and others whom the Nazis thought were undesirable, were murdered.
And, this is the paper that…
didn’t mention, in bold front page outraged headlines, Daniel Pearl was murdered for being a Jew.
And, this is the paper that…
has failed to link the beheading of a Paris teacher to Jews, who demonstrated in French streets, fearing that such a vile act against tolerance will target them next.
There are many more examples, than the snubbing of Chanukah, the Holocaust, Daniel Pearl, and French Jews, but I don’t want to lose my lunch.
A friend, routinely, sends New York Times articles to me, as if they are prime examples of truth in reporting. But without a NYT disclaimer of imbalance, I’m not impressed with that kind of truth.
The NYT rag is asking readers to make decisions to the effect that, despite being biased, always against Jews, the reporting is to be revered on all subjects…..
The example of the unbalanced publication of the Prager piece, that traditions of Chanukah are antiquated, worthless, meaningless and unimportant worries me because The NYT editorial board as a cheering squad of anti Semitic messages, invites other reporters to join in — as long as they remember that any reporting against Blacks, Muslims, all Christians but Catholics, Kwanza, Christmas, and any other holidays that reflect the winter solstice, will be considered a nasty offense, punishable by cancel culture public shaming, shunning, firing and possibly worse (just sayin’ in case any reporter is even thinking of goose stepping out of line).
And while we’re speaking of nastiness, if The NYT gets away with this, the next step might be the approval of a personal writing from a reporter who thinks that Passover is just some antiquated reason for having a big meal and singing songs. And, that anti Semitic thought brings to mind the Passover refrain of “Dayanu!!”, twisted in parody, to satirically fit the anti Semitic history and current culture of The NYT:
Wasn’t it enough that Arthur Hayes Sulzberger, didn’t report the Holocaust and made it clear to his staff that Jews in concentration camps weren’t an important news item? The Sulzberger family has said that they did this to “fall in line with the prevailing view” not to report alarming news. Ironically, The NYT had/has always prided itself on setting the tone for that prevailing view).
Wasn’t it enough that when AHS retired, and Arthur “Punch” Ochs Sulzberger (after a brief reshuffling of family players), took the reins and continued in the family’s anti Semitic tradition by not reporting anything related to those murders?
Wasn’t it enough that there was no NYT outrage about Daniel Pearl dying for being a Jew (no less a reporter of the WSJ, which makes him practically meshpokha)?
Wasn’t and isn’t it enough that The NYT has abysmally failed to report, (or to adequately report) as it would anti racism, the kind of anti semitism Jews now fear…….
in the subways and on the streets of New York and Brooklyn…..
in New Jersey, where Jews are hiding their yarmulkes when they go outside and taking down mezuzahs from “the doorposts of” their houses….
in Durham, NC City Council meeting rooms (and their disrespect of Jews who tried to speak against it)……
in Danville, California, where Jewish children have been taunted and the schools say little or nothing……
And now, isn’t it completely enough, that we, as Jews (and no other religious group, celebrating this time of year), are trashed -told (to the whole world, by The NYT) that celebrating Chanukah is meaningless and unimportant?
Although the Prager piece may seem like a blip in an anti Semitic chain of events, to every self respecting Jew, to whom Chanukah, and every other Jewish holiday, is a mark of identity, the piece is a bell ringer to say
ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!!!
Moreover, the irony of the anti Semitic slap of the unbalanced piece, as if it were the norm in every household in which a Jew lives, happens to be about a holiday that teaches Jewish children (and adults who are interested) the importance of defeating the power of those who seek to destroy us.
Just as Jews defeated leaders of armies, who disrespected them, Jews, and non Jews who care, can defeat a huge publication, by canceling their subscriptions to The NYT and any publications showing disrespect for Jews.
Blacks and Muslims would do no less to publications that dared to cross them. Why should we, as Jews, put up with more?
If, as a huge start, Jews and non Jews would work to defeat anti semitism, by canceling their subscriptions to The NYT, boycotting advertisers, and encouraging others to do the same, the solidarity of many would show all publications that Jews -although a tiny minority of the population- refuse to be abused. If other publications don’t hear the bell, Jews (and non Jews who care)should cancel those subscriptions and boycott their advertisers, as well.
The NYT can expect any more Jews to be caged in, to pay for any part of any space in which the NYT can heap on abuse (sort of like the old Southern, doubly abusive, child rearing tactic of asking the child to bring a switch with which the child is to beaten),
and before the NYT can even think to use part of any space, to publish any other such uncontroverted anti Semitic piece…..that it’s not worth the time being it takes to be a Jew……that Judaism is just some old religion, in which a bunch of old guys, were asking a lot of old questions, in some old books……
check out one of those old books and answer one of those old questions, posed by one of those old guys, Hillel The Elder (that said, some of the guys were not that old)…..
“If not now, when?”
If you’ve answered the question, with “now”, then please cancel your subscriptions to anti Semitic social media time wasters and bird cage liners. And please tell those sources of hate (and any advertisers who fund those sources) why we’re refusing to be caged.