What’s Missing from NY Times Article on J Street

By Published On: September 14, 2009

James Traub’s fawning “news analysis” (read promotional plug) on J Street in the New York Times Magazine notes that the organization is “named after the street missing from Washington’s grid and thus evoking a voice missing from Washington’s policy discussions.” Traub’s admiring article is itself guilty of missing critical information about the upstart lobby group.

Repeating without challenge J Street’s assertion that polling data (polls, polls, always polls with J Street) indicates that Jewish Americans largely support its agenda, Traub writes:

J Street maintains that most American Jews share its views on the Middle East. . . . The question is how much of an exception they make for Israel. J Street sought to answer this question by commissioning an extensive poll of Jewish opinion on MIddle East issues. The survey, taken in July 2008 and repeated with almost identical findings in March, found that Americans Jews opposed further Israeli settlements (60 percent to 40 percent), that they overwhelmingly supported the proposition that the U.S. should be actively engaged in the peace process even if that entailed “publicly stating its disagreeements with both the Israelis and the Arabs” and that they strongly supported doing so even when the premise was revised to “publicly stating its disagreements with Israel.”

One wonders if the New York Times Magazine writer bothered to actually look at the poll in question before he breathlessly recounted J Street’s wishful thinking that the results indicate that the American Jewish public is behind them. Shmuel Rosner, a veteran reporter on American-Israeli affairs, wrote about that very same March poll:

1. J Street’s press release reads the following: “Instead of holding the hawkish, hard-line positions often expressed by many established Jewish organizations and leaders, American Jews actually overwhelmingly support assertive peace efforts and an active U.S. role in helping Israelis and Arabs to resolve their conflict? American elected officials and politicians have for years fundamentally misread the American Jewish community,” said Jeremy Ben-Ami, J Street’s executive director in the press release.

But here’s what the poll says: More people agree that “established” and “traditional” Jewish organizations represent their views than the number of people who say such organizations do not represent them. Even when AIPAC – supposedly the great Satan – is mentioned by name, more people (34 percent) believe it accurately represents their views than those (23 percent) who don’t. The 40 percent who do not have an opinion also represent a group that can hardly be considered “fundamentally misread.”

2. J Street opposes military action against Iran, “a terrible option for the U.S., regional stability, and for Israel.” But American Jews will be more likely than not to vote for a Congressional candidate who believes that “America must do everything it can to protect Israel’s security. This means militarily attacking Iran if they pursue a nuclear weapons program, supporting an Israeli pre-emptive strike against Iran, cutting off aid to the Palestinians if their schools allow textbooks that don’t recognize Israel, and letting the Palestinians know where we stand on Jerusalem by moving the U.S. embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.” . . .

3. My friends at the Orthodox Union (I have friends all around town) were quick to note, that J Street’s PR for their poll conveniently omits mention of its findings on an issue we feel is of the utmost importance – the indivisibility of Jerusalem. Even among their respondents – who support ‘assertive peace efforts and an active U.S. role’ (i.e. pressure) and withdrawal from the West Bank – a majority do NOT believe Jerusalem should be re-divided with its eastern neighborhoods becoming part of a Palestinian state.”

And here are our own observations about the gaps between J Street’s poll results and the organization’s positions:

— J Street called for lifting the blockade of the Gaza Strip, while 75 percent of its poll respondents “support Israel’s blockade of Gaza if the Palestinians block the agreement from being reached.”

— During Cast Lead, J Street maintained that “there is nothing ‘right’ in punishing a million and a half already-suffering Gazans for the actions of the extremists among them,” but its poll found that 69 percent of respondents disagreed with the statement “With hundreds of Palestinian civilian deaths and a humanitarian crisis resulting from a month of no electricity and clean water throughout Gaza, Israel’s response to Hamas’ attacks was disproportionate.” Hardly a ringing endorsement of J Street’s views.

Thus, for all the mighty efforts of the pollster who carried out this poll, Jim Gerstein, a former J Street VP (can you say conflict of interest?), J Street was still able not to get the results it had wanted. But the lobby group was able to convince the New York Times otherwise.

We expose the anti-Israel lies so you don't have to. But we can't do it without your help. Join the fight -- Donate now
Tell the World – Share Now!

More from SNAPSHOTS

  • Reuters Arabic Misidentifies Dome of Rock

    June 2, 2020

    The following photo and caption appeared in the Arabic version of an article by Reuters’ Stephen Farrell, published on April 24 and dedicated to the opening Friday of Ramadan in the Old City of Jerusalem: [...]

  • When Palestinians Like Checkpoints

    April 2, 2020

    To some pundits, it goes without saying that checkpoints in the West Bank should be discussed with the bleakest of terms. The checkpoints Israel erected in the West Bank during waves of Palestinian suicide bombings [...]

  • CNN’s Amanpour Condemns “power grab” By Israel’s Prime Minister and Others

    April 1, 2020

    We’ve said it often, but it’s worth repeating: Anyone interested in reasonably unbiased information about Israel (at least) should avoid the broadcasts of CNN’s Chief International Correspondent and Anchor, Christiane Amanpour. In characterizing responses to [...]

  • Italian Artist Posts Image of Jewish Ritual Murder on Facebook Page

    March 25, 2020

    Giovanni Gasparro being interviewed on a news show in Italy at the unveiling of one of his paintings at a basilica in Italy. (YouTube screenshot) Giovanni Gasparro, a popular artist in Italy, has posted images [...]

  • NY Times Shows How Framing Slants Coverage

    March 16, 2020

    A couple of days ago, we highlighted how David Halbfinger, the New York Times bureau chief in Jerusalem, cast Israel's prime minister as a scold for, well, trying to protect vulnerable populations from a pandemic. [...]

  • Seattle Media Oblivious To Imam’s Hateful Indoctrination Condemning Jews

    January 7, 2020

    The Masjid Ar-Rahmah mosque teaching – that Allah transformed Jews into apes and pigs for disobeying him – delivered by Imam (prayer leader) Mohamad Joban – was posted online by mosque personnel. This December 2019 [...]

  • AP Distorts: Bethlehem ‘Almost Completely Surrounded’

    December 10, 2019

    Over two years after improving inaccurate language falsely citing Israel's security "barrier surrounding the biblical city" of Bethlehem, the Associated Press once again misrepresents. AP's Joseph Krauss and Mohammad Daraghmeh wrote yesterday ("Palestinians in Bethlehem [...]

  • Variety Redraws Israel’s Map

    December 10, 2019

    "Variety is the most authoritative and trusted source of entertainment business news," boasts its web site but readers should not have any expectations about the accuracy of its geopolitical coverage. A May 2019 movie review [...]

  • Again, NY Times Silent on Islamic Jihad Terror Designation

    November 13, 2019

    As we noted yesterday, the New York Times chose to remove the word “terror” from its article about fighting between Palestinian Islamic Jihad and Israel. While early versions of the story informed readers that Islamic [...]

  • Reuters Errs on Administrative Detention For ‘Anti-Israel Activity’

    November 5, 2019

    The Ofer Prison, near Ramallah (Photo by Tamar Sternthal) A Reuters article today egregiously misrepresents administrative detention, erroneously asserting that it is mainly applied to "Palestinians suspected of anti-Israeli activities," when in fact the Israeli [...]