Feedback on “20060816 KDDC NYTimes Warsaw Ghetto Uprising an Over Reaction.”
…More on the satire of the New York Times’ coverage of the Israeli-Hezbollah conflict and the New York Times’ coverage of the war on terrorism.
Although I usually do not respond to comments, the comment left by Zum was thoughtful and responsible in its approach and that kind of dialogue is always good, whether we agree of disagree.
Thank you for your feedback Mr./Ms. Zum.
If you did not catch it because the post has fallen off the front page of kevindayhoff.com, Zum says:
“I looked at this NY Times paper you've posted and at first look I was really skeptical that it could be the real thing. American sentiment in 1943 was very anti-Nazi since we were fighting the Germans at that time and having every front page article being anti-semitic seemed absolutely ludicrous to me.
I started to do some research and found that the New York Times archives did not have any articles with these headlines, and especially not on May 10, 1943. I researched the famous photo further and found out that it was actually originally taken by German SS troops and printed in a report to Himmler that was only recovered AFTER the war-----well after 1943.
Finally, I did some more looking around and found out that the whole thing is a hoax published by the The People's Cube, a Web site devoted to lampooning left-wing "political correctness." You can get all the details here:
http://urbanlegends.about.com/library/bl_1943_nytimes.htm
It's extremely ironic that you posted this to decry media propaganda when that is exactly what you have fallen prey to yourself. I hope you post a correction and apology so that the issue can be laid to rest in an honorable manner.
And I hope that you start to double check some of the propaganda that you post. There is a lot of misinformation flying around the internet and I hope that you feel strongly against being a tool of propaganda organizations, especially when they are outright lies.”
In the interest of full disclosure, I had hypothecated that the depiction of the May 10th, 1943 New York Times was a satirical hoax before I popped it up on the blog. Or, allow me to say it this way, I certainly hoped that it was a hoax.
That said, the venerable Old Gray Lady has recently presented with signs of senility, if not, outright dementia in its coverage of the Bush Administration’s policies and approach to the war on terrorism.
For more on this line of thought, please read my August 16th, 2006 Tentacle column: “London's calling.” Or, “Operation Mata Hari.”
There have been many recent responsible commentaries about how alarmed folks have become with the Times’ approach to putting Americans in danger in its passionate hatred of the Bush Administration.
Several pieces within easy reach of my keyboard are two Michael Barone columns, one from Monday, August 14th, 2006, titled, “London plot exposes Left.” Or perhaps a better example is Michael Barone’s June 26th, 2006 column, “Why do "they" hate us?”
Specifically, I am appalled at the propaganda approach of the liberal media in support of Hezbollah. To be certain, I have no first hand knowledge of a specific New York Times article or editorial that was detrimental to the Israeli cause. I have read suggestions and anecdotes that the Old Gray Lady was on
The thought that some folks may have considered that the satirical depiction of a hoax New York Times’ front page to be “real” speaks well for the suggestion that the New York Times has become iconography (the poster child, if you will) for irresponsible approaches to our nation’s national security and the safety and welfare of Americans – or anyone else that the jihadists may want to harm.
After all, satire works best when the “suspension of disbelief” works. In the case of the New York Times, many of us have long since lost any ability to give the
To the point that the recent comment made by Ann Coulter has received so much play… Are you aware that the New York Times’ “reaction to al-Zarqawi's death was to lower the
Zum calls to our attention an Urban Legends and Folklore article about the “May 10th, 1943 New York Times” front page satire. Now ya know a satire has arrived when Urban Legends feels the need to address it.
In the article, Urban Legends asks the question: “Do you think this parody is a valid critique of the editorial stance of today's NY Times?”
My view is a resounding, YES!
1943 New York Times Calls Warsaw Ghetto Uprising 'Over-Reaction'
Netlore Archive: Circulating via email, an image purporting to show the front page of the May 10, 1943 edition of the New York Times with a headline declaring that the Warsaw
Comments: Nothing of the sort ever appeared on the front page of the New York Times. It's a parody, ripped from its original context in a satirical article published by the The People's Cube, a Web site devoted to lampooning left-wing "political correctness."
Albeit heavy-handed and overwrought to the point of incoherence, the piece is an attempt to ridicule those who have criticized
Given any thought, the headlines themselves betray the author's satirical intent: "European Leaders Blame Jews for Disproportionate Response," "Jewish Resistance Shatters Hopes for Peaceful Final Solution," and "Peace Vigil Calls for a Cease-Fire." It's an understatement to say they don't reflect the reality of the time.
For good measure, I scanned the New York Times archives and found several articles reporting the horrific conditions in the Warsaw Ghetto, the events leading up to the uprising, and the uprising itself, none of which evinced even a hint of criticism toward the Jews who took up arms against the Nazis in 1943.
Many feel that The People's Cube approach was appropriately “heavy-handed and overwrought to the point of incoherence,” In response to the New York Times’ “heavy-handed and overwrought to the point of incoheren(t)” approach to issues of our safety and national security.
My only regret in posting the parody of the New York Times is that I did do the parody myself. When I was younger and had different time constraints, I so enjoyed doing the very same approach to newspapers with a consistent irresponsible approach to currents events and issues of the day.
If anyone owes anyone an apology, it is the New York Times.
I will be flying in a week, and I sure hope that the New York Times does not reveal anymore anti-terrorism programs between now and the time I board the plane… to Hezbollah – or anyone else who wants to cut my head off simply because I am an American and because they have issues going back to the reign of Caesar.
I respect that militant jihadists are upset. I do not respect the killing of innocent civilians to promote a dialogue about their issues. Or hiding behind innocent civilians as they rocket and kill even more innocent civilians.
Ultimately, I have lost all respect for the New York Times. For that - I post parodies. This is a profoundly different approach than the New York Times, which expresses its lack of respect for the Bush Administration by putting all our lives in danger.
I also have a great deal of respect for Zum, for taking the time to write a thoughtful comment delineating his disagreement with the post. Thank you.
As always, your thoughtful consideration is appreciated regardless of the outcome on any particular issue. Whether we agree or disagree, always find my door open for friendly constructive dialogue.
E-mail him at: kdayhoff@carr.org
####
