Have any Irish media admitted it yet?

Force136

The Guardian newspaper confronted earlier this week claims alleging that the U.K. daily published material that included language that could be construed as anti-Semitic, admitting that it had to be "more vigilant" to maintain the Guardian's reputation.

In a column published on Sunday, the paper's readers' editor Chris Elliot referred to claims that the "Guardian, in print or online, is carrying material that either lapses into language resonant of anti-Semitism or is, by its nature, anti-Semitic."

http://www.haaretz.com/jewish-world/u-k-s-guardian-owns-up-to-inadvertent-cases-of-anti-semitism-1.394851

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/nov/06/averting-accusations-of-antisemitism-guardian


So reluctantly and half-heartedly, the Guardian finally owns up to what we all knew.

Next, the BBC might make an admission - although I won't hold my breath.

humanji

I can't click on the links where I am. What is it all about?

polakdot

Force136 wrote: »

http://www.haaretz.com/jewish-world/u-k-s-guardian-owns-up-to-inadvertent-cases-of-anti-semitism-1.394851

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/nov/06/averting-accusations-of-antisemitism-guardian


So reluctantly and half-heartedly, the Guardian finally owns up to what we all knew.

Next, the BBC might make an admission - although I won't hold my breath.

utter rubbish....i pressume your reason for posting is to stir up some anti semetic remarks is it??

Anti israeli comment isnt anti semetic..

but of course you know that already ..you are just here to stir..

Force136

polakdot wrote: »

utter rubbish....i pressume your reason for posting is to stir up some anti semetic remarks is it??

Anti israeli comment isnt anti semetic..

but of course you know that already ..you are just here to stir..

So the Guardian's own admission is "utter rubbish" ?

So what you're telling me is that the editor of the Guardian admitting anti-semitic slurs in Guardian articles is wrong, but an anonymous person on an internet forum (that's you) is right?

The question now is, who should I believe? it's a quandary.

polakdot

Force136 wrote: »

So the Guardian's own admission is "utter rubbish" ?

So what you're telling me is that the editor of the Guardian admitting anti-semitic slurs in Guardian articles is wrong, but an anonymous person on an internet form (that's you) is right?

The question now is, who should I believe? it's a quandary.

:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:...read some history...and realise the difference between debating an issue,and promoting your own agenda.

Your bias is utterly emotional and therefor unintelligent.

Most right thinking israelis would dismiss you as a crank.

astrofool

Force136 wrote: »

So the Guardian's own admission is "utter rubbish" ?

So what you're telling me is that the editor of the Guardian admitting anti-semitic slurs in Guardian articles is wrong, but an anonymous person on an internet forum (that's you) is right?

The question now is, who should I believe? it's a quandary.

It's not anti-semetic slurs. In the Guardian's own words: "published material that included language that could be construed as anti-Semitic".

JustinDee

Force136 wrote: »

Next, the BBC might make an admission - although I won't hold my breath.

So on one hand there are British right-wing gentiles alleging the BBC is anti-semitic and on the other hand, there are left-wing gentiles calling it pro-Israeli and run by Jews?

Make up your mind, eh?

Force136

JustinDee wrote: »

So on one hand there are British right-wing gentiles alleging the BBC is anti-semitic and on the other hand, there are left-wing gentiles calling it pro-Israeli and run by Jews?

Make up your mind, eh?

Come back to me when you've stopped pretending to be an Israeli. You're an embarrassment to the rest of the Irish here, which is a monumental task - I assure you.

al28283

Force136 wrote: »

Come back to me when you've stopped pretending to be an Israeli. You're an embarrassment to the rest of the Irish here, which is a monumental task - I assure you.

Hasn't embarrassed me at all

Paxmanwithinfo

The main aim of your post appears to be promote an agenda. Are you related to KEITH AFC by any chance?

Enjoy your weekend and don't let the weight of the world get you down.

polakdot

al28283 wrote: »

Hasn't embarrassed me at all

hasnt embarressed me even a smigdeen mo chara..

you on the other hand , force 123,are embarressing not only your fellow countrymen,but also your religious brethren..

JustinDee

polakdot wrote: »

hasnt embarressed me even a smigdeen mo chara..
you on the other hand , force 123,are embarressing not only your fellow countrymen,but also your religious brethren..

He is neither Israeli nor Jewish so no need for supposition like the above so his ill-conceived insults are fairly innocuous anyway.
Nearest he's been to being Jewish or Israel is passing Golder's Green on the nr.13 route or Northern Line.

dsmythy

polakdot wrote: »

utter rubbish....i pressume your reason for posting is to stir up some anti semetic remarks is it??

Anti israeli comment isnt anti semetic..

but of course you know that already ..you are just here to stir..

Nobody questions the always unbiased threads about the Palestinians....

The OP started a thread and gave his opinion.

polakdot

JustinDee wrote: »

He is neither Israeli nor Jewish so no need for supposition like the above so his ill-conceived insults are fairly innocuous anyway.
Nearest he's been to being Jewish or Israel is passing Golder's Green on the nr.13 route or Northern Line.

My point was actually whatever his religion or nationality ,his fellow "people" would be embarressed by his post.

pacquiao

Force136 wrote: »

http://www.haaretz.com/jewish-world/u-k-s-guardian-owns-up-to-inadvertent-cases-of-anti-semitism-1.394851

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/nov/06/averting-accusations-of-antisemitism-guardian


So reluctantly and half-heartedly, the Guardian finally owns up to what we all knew.

Next, the BBC might make an admission - although I won't hold my breath.

Why are you hijacking Judaism ?

Force136

pacquiao wrote: »

Why are you hijacking Judaism ?

I was under the impression that I was posting a political news article in the appropriate forum.

Instead of attacking me, why not discuss the issue at hand.

I thought it would be quite important to post here, as I very much doubt the Irish media or anyone here would have reported/posted it.

Force136

Justin, I haven't come here pretending to be a different nationality.

Whereas you seem concerned with alluding to (without actually stating it as fact) that you're an Israeli citizen who served in the IDF.

So which is it? Irish, Israeli or Ahmed pretending to be one or the other?

And if you want a little contest vis-a-vis knowledge on Israel, I'm here to furnish you with a verbal and intellectual beat down.

Just let me know.

polakdot

Force136 wrote: »

Justin, I haven't come here pretending to be a different nationality.

Whereas you seem concerned with alluding to (without actually stating it as fact) that you're an Israeli citizen who served in the IDF.

So which is it? Irish, Israeli or Ahmed pretending to be one or the other?

And if you want a little contest vis-a-vis knowledge on Israel, I'm here to furnish you with a verbal and intellectual beat down.

Just let me know.

reported again.

polakdot

this troll is all over boards trying to stir it up.....force 169...

just report him and be done with his nonsense..

pacquiao

Force136 wrote: »

I was under the impression that I was posting a political news article in the appropriate forum.

Instead of attacking me, why not discuss the issue at hand.

I thought it would be quite important to post here, as I very much doubt the Irish media or anyone here would have reported/posted it.

Anti Jewish nonsense is getting out of hand.
And what do you want from the Irish media? You want the Irish media to say sorry for having published a negative article towards the Israeli governments policies?

JustinDee

Force136 wrote: »

Justin, I haven't come here pretending to be a different nationality.

Whereas you seem concerned with alluding to (without actually stating it as fact) that you're an Israeli citizen who served in the IDF.

So which is it? Irish, Israeli or Ahmed pretending to be one or the other?

And if you want a little contest vis-a-vis knowledge on Israel, I'm here to furnish you with a verbal and intellectual beat down.

Just let me know.

Don't be so childish.
You post ill-informed incorrect generalisms about Irish people in relation to Israel with the delusion that what you say is dead-set. I pointed out that not all here think as you say and that some have plenty of insight into the region from first-hand experience. The rest is blinkered, unqualified pro-agendaic pot-stirring wiki-wagging.

Godge

Force136 wrote: »

So the Guardian's own admission is "utter rubbish" ?

So what you're telling me is that the editor of the Guardian admitting anti-semitic slurs in Guardian articles is wrong, but an anonymous person on an internet forum (that's you) is right?

The question now is, who should I believe? it's a quandary.

Have you actually read the links?

Firstly, it is not the editor of the Guardian who has admitted anti-semitic slurs. It is the reader's editor, who acts as an ombudsman for complaints.

Secondly, as ombudsman for complaints, he has a weekly blog in which he discusses issues that have been raised by readers, some of them correct, some of them unfounded. They are surfaced for discussion purposes. You stumbled on the one relating to anti-semitism.

Thirdly, he states that he has upheld three complaints in ten months around the issue of anti-semitism. Given the number of articles that would have been written during that period about Israeli issues in the Guardian, both online and in the papers, that is not a huge amount of complaints to have been upheld.

I am not taking any position on whether the Guardian is anti-semitic or not but on the evidence you have produced, I would have to say "not proven".

Mr.Micro

JustinDee wrote: »

Don't be so childish.
You post ill-informed incorrect generalisms about Irish people in relation to Israel with the delusion that what you say is dead-set. I pointed out that not all here think as you say and that some have plenty of insight into the region from first-hand experience. The rest is blinkered, unqualified pro-agendaic pot-stirring wiki-wagging.

I suspect, I may be wrong, but this poster, Force136 appears to be anti Irish and that is his beef, dressed up as pro Israeli?

Molloys Clondalkin

An important feature of the Guardian online is that the comment threads are post-moderated: a team of moderators check almost half a million comments a month posted on the site for language that breaches the community guidelines across a whole range of issues – not just antisemitism. They are experienced in spotting the kind of language long associated with antisemitic tropes such as Jews having too much power and control, or being clannish and secretive, or the role of Jews in finance and the media.
Newspapers have to be aware that some examples involve coded references. They need to ask themselves, for example, if the word Zionist is being used as a synonym for Jew.
I have been careful to say that these examples may be read as antisemitic because I don't believe their appearance in the Guardian was the result of deliberate acts of antisemitism: they were inadvertent. But that does not lessen the injury to some readers or to our reputation. The Guardian should not be oppressed by criticism – some of the language used by our critics is abusive and intimidatory – or retreat into self-censorship. But reporters, writers and editors must be more vigilant to ensure our voice in the debate is not diminished because our reputation has been tarnished.


This is an interesting bit here
The conspiricay thorey forum would be awash with complaints :pac:
But it does raise the question that some people may see certain terms in certain contexts insulting while others can give a mere meh approach to it. (Im not just talking about Anti Semitism either the term Mullah is often thrown around with a double meaning )
Is there scope for this in the charter for boards I wonder ?

edanto

Force136 wrote: »

So reluctantly and half-heartedly, the Guardian finally owns up to what we all knew.

Where as in actual fact, the Guardian shows it's efforts to be balanced and to AVOID being anti-semitic by saying...

The Guardian wrote:

Three times in the last nine months I have upheld complaints against language within articles that I agreed could be read as antisemitic. The words were replaced and the articles footnoted to reflect the fact.

You're showing an incredibly ability to ignore the overall thrust of the article written and cherry pick quotes out of context. That uniquely qualifies you to defend Israeli foreign policy. You won't find much support around here.

Goodbye.

hatrickpatrick

Oh come on. Criticizing Israel's brutal regime and religious extremists is no more anti semitic than criticizing the Westboro Baptist Church is anti Christian. The majority of Jews are not violent, supremacist psychopaths, the far right government of Israel under Netanyahu most certainly is.

Here's an analogy: Am I being racist against all Irish people if I call our previous government a band of criminals and gobsh!tes? Because that would make vast numbers of Irish people anti-Irish.

I'm quite sick of seeing the anti semitism card played every time Israel's actions are opposed. Acknowledging that the Israeli government is an violent, imperialist regime is not racism in any way, shape or form.

brimal

I don't agree with the OP's point here, but you would have to be blind to not notice the antisemitic tones in some peoples posts here on Boards.ie

One forum in particular(not Politics) on this site is a breeding ground for antisemitism.

HalloweenJack

hatrickpatrick summed up my opinion perfectly on the charging of people with anti-Semitism whenever they criticise the Israeli government.

Of the comments mentioned in the Guardian link, the only article that I thought made any kind of anti-Semitic point was the one mentioned about Gene Shallit and when the columnist referred to him as chosen. I can't stress the columnist angle enough. If it were a regular Guardian report than fine, you could accuse the whole paper of being anti-Semitic. But columnists are generally accepted as pushing their own agendas/views in their columns and don't speak for the papers as a whole. Do people really belief that Fintan O'Toole or Kevin Myers speak for the Irish Times and the Indo as a whole when they respectively produce their pieces? This is the case here, while the Guardian published the article, the piece is going to express the columnists' opinion, not the paper as a whole and most people will recognise that.

Also, there is no full admission from the Guardian. They did not say "we deliberately printed anti-Semitic articles", they said "We printed articles that could be construed by some as anti-Semitic".

JustinDee

HalloweenJack wrote: »

But columnists are generally accepted as pushing their own agendas/views in their columns and don't speak for the papers as a whole. Do people really belief that Fintan O'Toole or Kevin Myers speak for the Irish Times and the Indo as a whole when they respectively produce their pieces? This is the case here, while the Guardian published the article, the piece is going to express the columnists' opinion, not the paper as a whole and most people will recognise that

On a slight aside, a newspaper is responsible for all of its content, syndicated, appointed or composed in-house.
Any Op-Ed copy in a newspaper like the Irish Times, for example, is selected by two levels of editor before it goes to print.

A newspaper's content represents that newspaper.

Back to the subject of the deliberately pot-stirring thread, yes, all the editor in question was saying is that some content could be interpreted, intentionally or otherwise, as anti-semitic.

professore

Well the Irish Independent is anti foreigner, loves using the term "non-national" which is an awful term, almost like "non-person" or "non-human" . Also is anti-traveller, anti single mother, anti anyone on welfare, anti civil service worker so if it's anti Semitic, I'm not sure, but if so it's pretty broad in it's hatred against anything not Robbie Keane supporting Dub - the ones who work of course, so everyone gets hated and blamed equally in poorly researched tabloid style articles.

Probably not, because being Jewish is one of those protected terms now along with being gay or being black, newspapers know that using any reference to those in an article rightly brands them as racist or sexist or whatever, so it has to use less obvious targets or roundabout ways of doing it. It's just pandering to it's readers predjudices unfortunately.

HalloweenJack

JustinDee wrote: »

On a slight aside, a newspaper is responsible for all of its content, syndicated, appointed or composed in-house.
Any Op-Ed copy in a newspaper like the Irish Times, for example, is selected by two levels of editor before it goes to print.

A newspaper's content represents that newspaper.

I agree that papers should be 100% responsible for all their content. If they publish something dodgy, they should deal with the repercussions, undoubtedly, as was the case with the Guardian.

However, I think it's a step too far to suggest that one columnist's comments genuinely reflect the "house style" of an entire paper. To me, columnists are slightly different. They don't take their lead from above, they do their own thing.

JustinDee

HalloweenJack wrote: »

I agree that papers should be 100% responsible for all their content. If they publish something dodgy, they should deal with the repercussions, undoubtedly, as was the case with the Guardian.

However, I think it's a step too far to suggest that one columnist's comments genuinely reflect the "house style" of an entire paper. To me, columnists are slightly different. They don't take their lead from above, they do their own thing.

Nothing to do with "style" actually.
A newspaper is fully responsible and liable for its columnists, reportage and editorials.

alboco

I imagine that the Guardian is reacting to falling readership by generating a little controversy.

skimpydoo

Just thought I would make a point that nobody yet has brought. Anti-semitic can also be prejudice against arabs who live in the region of Israel. Maybe of topic slightly but still worth a mention.

JustinDee

Ronan Leonard wrote: »

Just thought I would make a point that nobody yet has brought. Anti-semitic can also be prejudice against arabs who live in the region of Israel. Maybe of topic slightly but still worth a mention.

Semantics really.
Anti-semitism is taken in the main part as irrational discrimination by non-Jews on Jews as an opposite to Philo-semitism.

skimpydoo

JustinDee wrote: »

Semantics really.
Anti-semitism is taken in the main part as irrational discrimination by non-Jews on Jews as an opposite to Philo-semitism.

Maybe but just making a point to that guy force who was shouting his mouth off on here.

Chuck Stone

The catch all term 'antisemitism' has been so debased by those who seek to stifle criticism of the state of Israel that when I see it I just get that little 'oh FFS' reflex.

As for the OP.

Force136 wrote: »

You have such a deluded romanticised version of Ireland

Mate, you blow people up in cafes, pubs, hotels etc - it's no wonder you have such an affinity with 'palestinians'.

Stop the romance and face the reality. Ireland is a violent, racist state. There's a penchant for violence in Ireland.

If you lot weren't always practically anaesthetised from drink, there would be a lot more internal violence.

Force136 wrote: »

An Irishman invented a submarine?

No chance. I can't believe it.

Do you mean he invented 'holding his breath' under water ?

Force136 wrote: »

Oh look, a racist Irishman - what a surprise.

Need we say more?

ed2hands

Pardon me for interrupting the thread. Won't be a sec.

brimal wrote: »

One forum in particular(not Politics) on this site is a breeding ground for antisemitism.

A breeding ground?
That's a pretty serious statement. Which forum would that be then?
Think i can guess though based on your "thanking" of certain posts there.

Care to expand on that with something to back up your slur? Maybe you should start a thread in Feedback for this grave matter.
Or is your casual statement of fact actually just a baseless interpretation going on nothing more than your own jumping to conclusions/active imagination?
I know which option my money's on...

HalloweenJack

JustinDee wrote: »

A newspaper is fully responsible and liable for its columnists, reportage and editorials.

Yes, I know, and that's not what I'm saying.

I'm saying one columnist's opinion is not entirely, and should not be, representative of any newspaper as a whole. The regular editorials and the tone of their news articles is the true reflection of the newspaper's views/approach.

Pamwe Chete

A cursory look on the boards.ie forum shows a serious obsession with Israel bordering on an unhealthy infatuation. Almost a sort of jealous-ridden, angry, one-sided love affair.

Certainly this crosses into rampant anti-semitism.

If we look at how this reflects in reality - we see that whilst thousands are gunned down in the streets of Syria, the Irish are preoccupied with delivering so-called 'aid' to Gaza, as Israel is busy delivering luxury cars into the territory.

We should also take into account historic anti-semitism which has been as much a part of Irish culture as drinking and dancing funny.

Mr.Micro

Pamwe Chete wrote: »

A cursory look on the boards.ie forum shows a serious obsession with Israel bordering on an unhealthy infatuation. Almost a sort of jealous-ridden, angry, one-sided love affair.

Certainly this crosses into rampant anti-semitism.

If we look at how this reflects in reality - we see that whilst thousands are gunned down in the streets of Syria, the Irish are preoccupied with delivering so-called 'aid' to Gaza, as Israel is busy delivering luxury cars into the territory.

We should also take into account historic anti-semitism which has been as much a part of Irish culture as drinking and dancing funny.

Force136 back under a new name with the same tired old postings about the Irish and Nazis and anti semitism......yawn yawn. Try a new tack if you would be so kind.

Pamwe Chete

Mr.Micro wrote: »

Force136 back under a new name with the same tired old postings about the Irish and Nazis and anti semitism......yawn yawn. Try a new tack if you would be so kind.

Force what? Not sure what you're talking about and I'm sorry Irish racism bores you, but it needs to be discussed. You can't keep hiding behind the "I'm just a humble anti-Zionist" shtick. No one believes that, no one.

Mr.Micro

Pamwe Chete wrote: »

Force what? Not sure what you're talking about and I'm sorry Irish racism bores you, but it needs to be discussed. You can't keep hiding behind the "I'm just a humble anti-Zionist" shtick. No one believes that, no one.

Who cares, we are an Independent nation and will voice our opinions and tough if people do not like them.

al28283

Pamwe Chete wrote: »

Force what? Not sure what you're talking about and I'm sorry Irish racism bores you, but it needs to be discussed. You can't keep hiding behind the "I'm just a humble anti-Zionist" shtick. No one believes that, no one.

Force is back

Pamwe Chete

Mr.Micro wrote: »

Who cares, we are an Independent nation and will voice our opinions and tough if people do not like them.

Not too sure about the 'independent' part, seeing as you'd be queuing up for bread if it wasn't for the EU/British bailout. Funny that you had to go on your knees to the British for help. Your so-called oppressors, the ones whose men, women and children you slaughtered with cowardly attacks. Yet they still funded you. Personally, I would have loved to see Ireland turn into a 1980's Ethiopia.

Mr.Micro

al28283 wrote: »

Force is back

I guessed that from the first post:D

Mr.Micro

Pamwe Chete wrote: »

Not too sure about the 'independent' part, seeing as you'd be queuing up for bread if it wasn't for the EU/British bailout. Funny that you had to go on your knees to the British for help. Your so-called oppressors, the ones whose men, women and children you slaughtered with cowardly attacks. Yet they still funded you. Personally, I would have loved to see Ireland turn into a 1980's Ethiopia.

We are made of string stuff here in Ireland and will be stronger when we get through this bad patch. You should visit sometime to see what a nice decent tolerant country we have.:)

RichieC

Pamwe Chete wrote: »

Not too sure about the 'independent' part, seeing as you'd be queuing up for bread if it wasn't for the EU/British bailout. Funny that you had to go on your knees to the British for help. Your so-called oppressors, the ones whose men, women and children you slaughtered with cowardly attacks. Yet they still funded you. Personally, I would have loved to see Ireland turn into a 1980's Ethiopia.

Do you not see hoe utterly ridiculous it is to be banging on about anti semitism while being openly anti Irish... probably not I suppose...

overshoot

Force is back

and gone again:D
hopefully he will keep his hypocritical ass off here

I'm British, and if you were an Israeli - (the proper kind, not some limp-wristed left wing, self-hater) you'd make it your personal mission to boycott Ireland for the rest of your life.

After the terrorism against my country, I certainly did.

^^^ just to prove my point and hopefully not get a ban. it is boards.ie afterall (got that of another thread... he actually got a thanks for it)

Pamwe Chete

RichieC wrote: »

Do you not see hoe utterly ridiculous it is to be banging on about anti semitism while being openly anti Irish... probably not I suppose...

Only if one counts the Irish as human.

RichieC

Pamwe Chete wrote: »

Only if one counts the Irish as human.

Touché