SNAPSHOTS-TOP.jpg

« Australia Withdraws From UN Durban Conference | Main | Free Speech 'Authority' Levels Baseless Charge »

August 24, 2011

NY Times Editor's Snide Tweet

rosenthal.jpg


Twitter sure can be helpful to readers, as an offhand tweet by New York Times editorial page editor Andrew Rosenthal demonstrates. His Twitter page includes a noteworthy entry for August 14, 2011. Commenting on a speech by recently announced GOP presidential candidate Rick Perry, Rosenthal took the opportunity to observe:

Perry announce speech. Did he miss a GOP cliche? One fave: Isreal (sic) won't have to worry about him. As if it ever has to worry about a US prez.
14 Aug via TweetDeck

The editor's sardonic (or, depending on interpretation, his snide, sarcastic, negative) comment that Israel has an automatic, no-worry relationship with every president is factually absurd and troubling coming from the man who heads the editorial page at the Times.

Israel has had rocky relationships with a number of presidents. Jimmy Carter, George H.W. Bush and Barack Obama, for instance, have all been perceived by Israelis as tilting toward the Arabs and away from the Jewish state.

The implication that Israel enjoys automatic favor at the highest political levels also carries with it the whiff of Walt/Mearsheimer and their fevered Israel Lobby paranoia.

Reading too much into a tweet? Probably not.

(Hat tip to an anonymous visitor to the CAMERA Web site)

Posted by AL at August 24, 2011 06:41 PM

Comments

disgusting... sounds like a small thing but it reeks of an antiIsrael attitude. Think of the mindset that would have to be there to make such a comment... very upsetting.

Posted by: steve at August 25, 2011 02:16 PM

As long as Israel responds to terrorist attacks like a 'pussy' the attacks will continue and grow in scope and frequency.

Posted by: Philip Datlof,MD at August 25, 2011 02:20 PM

Even if it was true, which as you demonstrate it isn't, what is wrong with the leader of the biggest democracy in the world supporting the only democracy in the Middle East. In the past 62 years which of the 22 murderous dictatorships that surround Israel should an American president support or give comfort to?

Posted by: Rod at August 25, 2011 04:51 PM

The tweet reveals a consistent pattern of editorial. It confirms a personal orientation that explains some of the Times' picks for its 'super' commentators (especially Roger Cohen).

Whether you or I like it or not, the NYT is still the newspaper of record in the US and in the world of international diplomacy. It must be 'taken on' and CAMERA does that. The paper is too important to be ignored by serious players. Indignation is an insufficient response

Posted by: edward Newman at August 25, 2011 05:18 PM

The glory of the USA is that everyone has the right to express their opinions. However, journalistic ethics demand that a journalist with strong personal opinions about their subject choose a different topic.

Such anti-Israel bias is unbecoming to the NYT!

Posted by: Susan Bergman at August 28, 2011 10:40 AM

"The implication that Israel enjoys automatic favor at the highest political levels also carries with it the whiff of Walt/Mearsheimer and their fevered Israel Lobby paranoia. "

...or the UN veto record of the US on matters concerning Israel. One of these two documents.

Posted by: Geoff at September 7, 2011 09:03 AM

If Iran or Syria get a pre-emptive hit in an attempt to save Israel, thus risking a nuclear winter for 100 million people, it'll be a southerner, gentile Zionist president that'll be responsible> Perry or Buchmann. They say theyre Reagan Republicans but Ronnie said we'd never be the aggressor in his STAR WAR Speech. But these pre-emptive GOPers are murderers.

Posted by: mm at September 11, 2011 11:02 PM

Guidelines for posting

This is a moderated blog. We will not post comments that include racism, bigotry, threats, or factually inaccurate material.

Post a comment




Remember Me?

(you may use HTML tags for style)