Nadene Goldfoot
Buried by the Times is a 2005 book by Laurel Leff.
The book is a critical account of The New York Times's coverage of Nazi atrocities against Jews that culminated in the Holocaust. It argues that the news was often buried in the back pages in part due to the view about Judaism of the paper's Jewish publisher, Arthur Hays Sulzberger. It also gives a critical look at the work of Times correspondents in Europe.
Leff examines the stances and performances of the Times's reporting and editorial staff. In the field, "She exposes the disturbing Nazi and Vichy attachments of a few European correspondents." While back in New York, Sulzberger's bias was shared by other Jewish staffers: "Between them and influential Catholics among the crucial night editors, who decided where to place news items, the imperiled Jews of Europe had no advocate in the newsroom.
There was also, of course, a disorganized Jewish community and a Roosevelt administration too preoccupied with the war, both not pushing hard enough for front-page coverage. But the bulk of the blame, in Leff’s telling, falls squarely at the feet of The Times's publisher, Sulzberger."
A number of observers have observed how badly informed the American public was about the Nazis' systematic murder of European Jews. Leff points out that the way The Times covered the Holocaust "contributed to the public's ignorance." But in addition to poorly informing the public, "The Times' coverage mattered so much," she writes, "because other bystanders, particularly the American government, American Jewish groups, and the rest of the American press, took cues from the paper. Among major American newspapers, it was unique in the information it received, how it disseminated the news, and to whom.
It comes down to this. Some of our own people have been our worst enemies, and this still holds true. Not all Jewish senators are apt to back Israel. The one from Vermont is a shunda. We have Christians who are much better friends who come to the floor with much better knowledge and backgrounds. The fact is that some Jews not only have helenized, but have become arch enemies because their power is their most important asset and not anything else.
The book received critical acclaim and was the recipient of the best media history book from the American Journalism Historians Association.
Sulzberger was a convinced Reformed Jew which was the basis of his assimilationist approach: Judaism for him was only a religion and that Jews were neither a race nor a people any more than Presbyterians or Methodists were a race. In December 1942 in a memo to New York Times staff he wrote "I have been trying to instruct the people around here on the subject of the word 'Jews', i.e., that they are neither a race nor a people, etc.," Former New York Times journalist Ari Goldman, in his review of the book, writes: "There can be little doubt that Sulzberger's views about Judaism trickled down to the editors making the decisions about what to put in the newspaper every day."
Arthur Hays Sulzberger was the publisher of The New York Times from 1935 to 1961. Jews started to suffer from the Nazi regime by 1933. During that time, daily circulation rose from 465,000 to 713,000 and Sunday circulation from 745,000 to 1.4 million;
American Jews during this period of Nazism were in denial themselves about who they were. They had become quite assimilated; hellenized, like Jews before them. Most couldn't understand why they were being singled out among the religions to be so hated. They had gone through much Jew-hatred but still couldn't see themselves as a race of people or any reason to hate a race. Among all the people on the planet, they were one most interested in laws, in fairness, and proved to have the least criminal element or alcoholic of all the peoples. What was there among them to hate so much? Sulzberger was similar to the many other Jews, but he had a power of the newspaper that others didn't have. He kept them from knowing facts by denying them information in his paper. He alone decided and he was a secular Jew.
That's one thing that has shocked the world; the creation of Israel, which has even shook up the assimilated or hellenistic Jews, for now they have to realize who their ancestors were. Sulzberger died in 1968, so he had Israel's creation in 1948 to accept. What did he do then? Hide that fact too? Did he ever acknowledge that he made a mistake?
A practicing Reform Jew, Sulzberger was an enthusiastic supporter of the American Council for Judaism, founded in June 1942 to oppose Zionism, giving it prominent coverage in his newspaper. In a 1946 speech, Sulzberger claimed that Zionism was to blame for some of the Jewish deaths in the Holocaust, and that the refugee crisis during the war had been “a manageable, social and economic problem” until “the clamor for statehood introduced an insoluable [sic] political element” into the issue. “It is my judgment that thousands dead might now be alive” if “the Zionists” had put “less emphasis on statehood” (I'm appalled at his thinking process!) To me, this shows what a lack of education on this topic has created. Actually, my background is similar to his, but my interest and curiosity was greater. I take that back, my family wasn't much different but I was provided the opportunity to attend Sunday school which led to my teaching there. That's where my curiosity and interest developed.
I have news for Sulzberger. We are Jews, and that is something special. We started off as a family going back to Abraham of Ur of the Chaldees, and then became a tribe, and the tribe then numbering 12 tribes, which was a country called Israel. He wouldn't know about all that, being he wasn't very interested in his background. As a newspaperman, I'm surprised that he had no curiosity about his religion with all our holidays. Being a secular Jew, his family may not have ever acknowledged anything about their culture and religion. It's something I am proud to be.
We are a people with our own language, Hebrew, our own culture, and we had our own country, food standards and rulers. We had our own religion from the very beginning, starting with Abraham, and then developed by Moses. As for a race, we were the Semites, people who belonged to the language family. People were divided into language groupings back then. We were in the Akkadian branch. We come in many colors, now, and like the Italians, our skin can become darker after exposure in the sun to a nice suntan, some of us starting off darker than others.
We go back thousands of years to King Saul who ruled from 1030 BCE to 1010 BCE BCE when King David took over till 970 BCE. That goes back 3,052 years ago. We've had a very long history as a people. Can the Presbyterians or Methodists compare with our history? Are their religions this old? Their answer has been that Jews have been replaced. We're no longer necessary, and so they really don't care what happens to us. They feel they are our replacement. Today it's the Evangelistic Christians who still have a heart and feel empathy for the Jews' position in society.
And the Muslims? I really don't know what their beef is about us. We were treated as Dhimmis, 2nd class citizens when in their country, except that the Sherif of Jerusalem, an Arab known as Haj Amin al-Husseini, the Grand Mufti, had an important position and didn't want to lose it. He stirred up many Arabs to be against the new immigrants of Israel even after Emir Feisal had a positive outlook with the creation of Israel and was looking forward to the learning his people could experience from the Jews.
Feisal became king of Syria and King of Iraq. His attitude changed as he saw his people react with the Grand Mufti and then switched positions.
Now that we have Israel #2, they have been threatened, and it's a revelation to have finally made the Abrahamic Agreement with four of the countries. Finally some sense is being made and peace with a few is happening in the midst of continuing threats in the world against us and others. The Muslims and Jews have had one thing in common; the belief in one G-d. That is a start. Their language is similar including some cognates. They both write from right to left. They both claim Abraham as a common ancestor and it looks like DNA goes along with that claim. Both have some males who carry the J1c3d Y haplogroup. Jews find this is a branch of J1, the Cohen gene.
History professor Haim Genizi called Leff's book "well-researched and well-written" and stated that the book "adds to the long list of works discussing Americans' apathy toward the Holocaust."
Which is the worst case? Reporters who are biased and write "fake news" or reporters
or reporters who just don't write about important situations at all? I see
examples of both continuing to happen. We have exemplary types of news coverage; radio, TV, computers, pods; we can receive news on our watches! But what of the reporting itself? What can we trust? How biased is it?
Well, one thing; you can tell that I'm all for Israel. I went there, I lived there for over 5 years, I worked there, and I am Jewish, a Jew with dual citizenship. I was a teacher in both countries.
I know very well that Israel and its Jews are always trying to do good. The thing that is most important to Jews is to do mitzvot (good deeds), and that they do, all the time. They are not gods, they are humans from every level of life, from poor to rich. Nobody has been under attack more than my people have since the beginning of time with the Philistines. Israel may not be perfect, but under the circumstances that they have been, I find it a joyous miracle that they have even lasted this long to live through the Exodus, into 1948, let alone accomplish all that they have. After all, through the ages there are always those that become hellenized. That I am here is a miracle.
Resource:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buried_by_the_Times
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_Hays_Sulzberger
https://jewishbubba.blogspot.com/2021/12/december-1941-in-portland-oregon-for.html
No comments:
Post a Comment