Thanks to some whiny people I don't get to read Tuesday Morning Quarterback any more

ixnay · October 21, 2003, 13:39

Like I do every Tuesday morning, I went to ESPN.com's Page 2 to read this week's Tuesday Morning Quarterback, the best recap of each week there is, with humor, obscure stats, and game analysis. What am I greeted with instead?

Quote:

To our readers: Tuesday Morning Quarterback will no longer be available on ESPN.com.

Well, damn. I figured Gregg Easterbrook decided to move on and do the column somewhere else, but it turns out that all of the TMQ archives and any mention of him on the site have disappeared.

I do some digging and find this article on Salon.

Turns out he was fired due to "anti-semitic" comments made on a completely different site:

Quote:

Here's most of the offending paragraph: "Set aside what it says about Hollywood that today even Disney thinks what the public needs is ever-more-graphic depictions of killing the innocent as cool amusement. Disney's CEO, Michael Eisner, is Jewish; the chief of Miramax, Harvey Weinstein, is Jewish. Yes, there are plenty of Christian and other Hollywood executives who worship money above all else, promoting for profit the adulation of violence. Does that make it right for Jewish executives to worship money above all else, by promoting for profit the adulation of violence? Recent European history alone ought to cause Jewish executives to experience second thoughts about glorifying the killing of the helpless as a fun lifestyle choice."

Now, I'm no Jew but if I were I don't think something like that would offend me. But apparently it offends some people and because of them I can't read my TMQ this week.

Dis · October 21, 2003, 13:40

godammit!

This sucks!

The jews will pay for this

Dis · October 21, 2003, 13:41

he has always been against the excessive violence in movies. He writes about that sometimes in TMQ

Az · October 21, 2003, 13:57

lord of the mark · October 21, 2003, 14:06

Most Jews have accepted his apology. The New Republic, which publishes his blog, and which itself is edited and published by Jews who are exquisitely sensitive about antiSemitism, decided to keep him on, and published a very eloquent acceptance of his apology. Abe Foxman of the ADL did not accept the apology, but I doubt thats what determined Disney's decision. IIUC ESPN wanted to keep him, and Michael Eisner himself insisted on his being fired. This isnt about the Jews so much (Easterbrook has long worked with Jews at the New Republic and elsewhere, all of whom are certain hes no antisemite) so much as its about not criticizing your boss in public. Note Eisner is mentioned by name - Eisner runs Disney, which owns ESPN, which Easterbrook works for. And Eisner is known for holding grudges.

pchang · October 21, 2003, 14:12

We need to boycott all Eisner related enterprises. That will teach him the true meaning of holding grudges.

EDIT:
I will go to CNNSI and Foxsports instead of ESPN
I will stop watching ABC (their show suck anyway)
I will not go to Disneyland

Ben Kenobi · October 21, 2003, 14:19

If it is to be anti-semitic to oppose the glorification of violence than I would be anti-semetic as well.

Spiffor · October 21, 2003, 14:20

I don't exactly get what is shocking or antisemitic in his blog, and I really don't see anything for which he should have apologized.

IIUC, he's saying that Jews should be more cautious before endorsing excessive violence in movies, because they have lived firsthand the product of excessive violence. It's exactly like saying the Japanese ought to not be too fond of the Atomic. I understand one can disagree with his moral statement, but I don't understand how one can find it offensive at all.

Apparently the mere use of the word "Jew" in sentences having a controversial tone are antisemitic today

Oerdin · October 21, 2003, 14:24

It sort of sounds like Easterbrook was complaining that Eisner & Weinstein we perpetuating a stereo type by releasing movies like Kill Bill though he didn't voice his concerns in an acceptable manner.

lord of the mark · October 21, 2003, 14:25

In fairness to those who criticized the blog - its not that he criticized violence in movies, or used the word jew - its probably the following words "Does that make it right for Jewish executives to worship money above all else" Now if you read and re-read it, you realize that hes not saying Jewish movie executives are any different from Christian movie executives - he IS holding Jews to a different standard, arguable perhaps, but not antisemitic in context. He just came out with something that SOUNDS antisemitic, probably cause of the pace of the blogging process, and its lack of editing. I understand why some were offended, and why he felt it appropriate to apologize - However I think ESPN firing him was NOT justified.

Dis · October 21, 2003, 14:32

it's more of a stereotype about jews and money than anything else.

Spiffor · October 21, 2003, 14:49

Quote:

Originally posted by Dissident
it's more of a stereotype about jews and money than anything else.

It is clear he expects the Christians to worship money above all else, and he actually expects the Jews to be more cautious.

Spiffor · October 21, 2003, 15:12

Is it me, or the thread title has just been edited by the mods ?

Apparently, "whiny Jews" is antisemite. I guess I'd better not start threads complaining about "whiny Americans" or "whiny leftists"

Arrian · October 21, 2003, 15:13

Noticed the mod edit myself.

-Arrian

Gangerolf · October 21, 2003, 15:17

"Is it me, or the thread title has just been edited by the mods ?"

how very ironic!

maybe a whiny jew told the mods?

Dis · October 21, 2003, 15:20

yes you can see the difference between the actual thread title, and the title above the initial thread starting post.

Ben Kenobi · October 21, 2003, 15:25

Perfect confirmation of the LoTM hypothesis. Just using the word 'jew' makes you antisemitic.

I'm going to start a thread about whiny Christians, and see if that gets edited.

lord of the mark · October 21, 2003, 15:40

Quote:

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi

Perfect confirmation of the LoTM hypothesis. Just using the word 'jew' makes you antisemitic.

I'm going to start a thread about whiny Christians, and see if that gets edited.

well not exactly.

As I stated, it was the conjunction of "Jews" with "worshipping money above all else" Quite a different matter.

And in case anybody asks, it was not me that asked the mods to edit the thread. But Im not thrilled that I have to point that out. And I dont see what the problem is with taking the word Jew out. I dont want to see threads about whiny blacks, muslims, gays, etc.

Sorry if thats too PC for y'all.

And no, this aint the same as christians whining about parking. Someone was complaining that some Jews were complaining about antisemitism. Recently the head of Malaysia made some antisemitic comments, and then when the West condemned him, said that the condemnation was the result of the Jews power. Now as you know i thought it was wrong to fire Easterbrook. But im troubled by this "whining" thing. So the basic implication is that if someone says something antisemitic, we'd better just shut up and take it. Kinda basic schoolyard bully tactic - first you hit somebody, then when they go to an adult you call them a tattle-tale.

Ben Kenobi · October 21, 2003, 15:48

LoTM:

Adherents of a religion ought to be able to admonish their brethren for falling short of the standards upheld by said religion.

The writer of this article wrote to improve the conduct of his brothers not as an excuse for persecution.

It is the same spirit as the Christians not loving their neighbours by parking in their driveways.

lord of the mark · October 21, 2003, 16:01

Quote:

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
LoTM:

Adherents of a religion ought to be able to admonish their brethren for falling short of the standards upheld by said religion.

The writer of this article wrote to improve the conduct of his brothers not as an excuse for persecution.

It is the same spirit as the Christians not loving their neighbours by parking in their driveways.

I understand what Easterbrook was trying to say. The problem was that his awkward wording made it look like he was saying Jewish movie execs worshipped money above all else - period. Thats what got people riled up. Saying that Jews worship money above all else is an old theme in western civilization - its one associated with vicious anti-semitism. Jews have died because non-Jews had that idea. Now christians are murdered in this world - in Sudan and elsewhere - but not on account of parking.

Again - Greg Easterbrook, to his credit, IS QUITE aware of the antisemitic implications of his wording, and has apologized for it. I am QUITE convinced the wording with its overtones WAS NOT intentional. I am therefore QUITE convinced that Greg Easterbrook is NOT an antisemite. About those who dont "get" why this is a matter of concern, Im not so sure.

DinoDoc · October 21, 2003, 16:05

Quote:

Originally posted by lord of the mark
Thats what got people riled up. Saying that Jews worship money above all else is an old theme in western civilization - its one associated with vicious anti-semitism

Well it's a good thing he never said that then. This is where the whiney accusation comes in LotM.

Dis · October 21, 2003, 16:05

I can care less, I just want more football talk

lord of the mark · October 21, 2003, 16:08

Quote:

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
LoTM:

Adherents of a religion ought to be able to admonish their brethren for falling short of the standards upheld by said religion.

The writer of this article wrote to improve the conduct of his brothers not as an excuse for persecution.

It is the same spirit as the Christians not loving their neighbours by parking in their driveways.

By the way, I dont think Easterbrook is Jewish, so he wasnt "admonishing his brethren".

Dis · October 21, 2003, 16:11

It could be a conspiracy. He's alway ragging on the NFL for not bringing all the football games to cable. You can only get them on satellite.

lord of the mark · October 21, 2003, 16:15

Heres some of what Easterbrook said in his apology:

"Looking back I did a terrible job through poor wording. It was terrible that I implied that the Jewishness of studio executives has anything whatsoever to do with awful movies like Kill Bill. Nothing about Eisner or Weinstein causes any movie to be bad or awful; they're just supervisors. For all I know neither of them even focused on the adoration-of-violence aspect until the reviews came out. My attempt to connect my perfectly justified horror at an ugly and corrupting movie to the religious faith and ethnic identity of certain executives was hopelessly clumsy.

Where I failed most is in the two sentences about adoration of money. I noted that many Christian executives adore money above all else, and in the 20-minute reality of blog composition, that seemed to me, writing it, fairness and fair spreading of blame. But accusing a Christian of adoring money above all else does not engage any history of ugly stereotypes. Accuse a Jewish person of this and you invoke a thousand years of stereotypes about that which Jews have specific historical reasons to fear. What I wrote here was simply wrong, and for being wrong, I apologize.

Every reporter who has called me today has asked me my faith. Since I say this is relevant for others, it's relevant for me. I'm a Christian. I worship in one of the handful of joint Christian-Jewish congregations in the United States. This website describes the Bradley Hills Presbyterian (USA) side of the church. This website describes Bethesda Jewish, a Klal Yisrael ("All Israel") congregation that shares the same worship spaces and finances. Two years ago I wrote in The New Republic of the Bradley Hills-Bethesda Jewish joint congregation, "One of the shortcomings of Christianity is that most adherents downplay the faith's interweaving with Judaism." I and my family sought out a place where Christians and Jews express their faith cooperatively, which seems to me a good idea. Bad idea: writing poorly about this, and being misunderstood. Again, I'm sorry. "

Now this man is, as we say, a "mensche" ( a real man, IE a truely ethical human being). I respect him and am impressed by him. I am NOT impressed at those who think the complaints about his wording are just whining - Easterbrook himself has eloquently explained why they are not.

Reading his apology, I am unhappy that he was fired by ESPN, pleased he was retained at TNR, and hope he soon gets a new gig. I am not pleased at those who dont understand the things that Greg Easterbrook DOES understand.

Spiffor · October 21, 2003, 16:16

In this case there were whiny people who yelled "antisemitism", when any reader with two cents of understanding could understand there is no antisemitism at all in there.

These whiny people must have been, most probably, Jews. I don't see any other category of population crying about antisemitism every time the word "Jew" is used (well, Germans do, but I don't think they have weighted in the decision

)

I remember the recent problem with Rush Limbaugh, stating that some black quarterback's achievements have been exaggerated because of his skin colour. All those who screamed "racism" are whiny IMHO. And if the blacks couldn't rely on a PC crowd to defend them on bad terrain, these whiny people would have been "whiny blacks".

LOTM:
I think there is nothing wrong in warning of antisemitism when it is justified. Mahathir's comments were obviously anti-semite, and this guy deserves to be criticized for that.
But many Jews have the really bad habit of screming "antisemitism" everytime the Jews or the Israelis get associated with something unpleasant. It pisses me off greatly, because these whiners completely denaturate this grave word. It pisses me off even more so, because according to such logic, we can't allow ourselves to criticize some Jews or to criticize Israel without being associated with the worst horror of modern history

Ben Kenobi · October 21, 2003, 16:16

Is he a Jew?

Seems like it to me. Says that Christians do the same thing but that the Jews ought to be held to a higher standard.

lord of the mark · October 21, 2003, 16:18

Quote:

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
Is he a Jew?

Seems like it to me. Says that Christians do the same thing but that the Jews ought to be held to a higher standard.

"Every reporter who has called me today has asked me my faith. Since I say this is relevant for others, it's relevant for me. I'm a Christian. " Gregg Easterbrook.

lord of the mark · October 21, 2003, 16:19

Quote:

Originally posted by Spiffor
In this case there were whiny people who yelled "antisemitism", when any reader with two cents of understanding could understand there is no antisemitism at all in there.

Gregg Eastebrook himself disagrees. To see why read his eloquent apology.

lord of the mark · October 21, 2003, 16:20

Quote:

Originally posted by Spiffor
These whiny people must have been, most probably, Jews. I don't see any other category of population crying about antisemitism every time the word "Jew" is used (well, Germans do, but I don't think they have weighted in the decision

)

But it wan just cause the word "jew" was used. How many times do i have to repeat that? And if you dont believe me, read what Easterbrook wrote in apology.