Skip to comments.Book Reveals: New York Times Buried Holocaust News
Posted on 03/17/2005 10:58:10 PM PST by deepFR
The New York Times consistently buried Holocaust news in its back pages and downplayed the victims' Jewish identity. So states the first scholarly study of how the Times covered the Nazi genocide. Buried by The Times: The Holocaust and America's Most Important Newspaper," by Prof. Laurel Leff, has just been published by Cambridge University Press.
Among the book's key findings, according to The David S. Wyman Institute for Holocaust Studies, are the following:
* Holocaust news was consistently relegated to the Times' back pages. Of the 1,186 articles that the Times published during 1939-1945 about Europe's Jews, only 26 (about two percent) of them appeared on the front page, and even those articles "obscured the fact that most of the victims were Jews."
* New York Times publisher Arthur Sulzberger, an assimilated Jew of German descent, feared that the newspaper would be engaging in special pleading and thus deliberately downplayed news of the Holocaust and the Jewish identity of the victims.
* The Times only rarely published editorials about the annihilation of Europe's Jews, and only once ran a lead editorial about the Nazi genocide.
* Because of its importance, the Times helped set the tone for the rest of the media's coverage of Holocaust news; the Times "might have been able to help bring the facts about the extermination of the Jews to public consciousness ... [instead,] the Times helped drown out the last cry from the abyss."
* When the Nazi death camps were liberated, the Times' coverage downplayed the fact that the victims and survivors were overwhelmingly Jews.
Author Prof. Leff, a former reporter and editor who teaches journalism at Northeastern University, is a leading member of the Academic Council of The Wyman Institute. The Wyman Institute is organizing Prof. Leff's speaking appearances around the United States.
Stuart Eizenstat, formerly the U.S. ambassador for Holocaust-era issues, called the book "engrossing and important," adding, "One can only wonder in great sorrow how many lives might have been saved if the nation's and the world's conscience had been touched by full and complete coverage by the Times of what remains the greatest crime of world history."
Marvin Kalb, elder statesman of American journalism, said that Buried by The Times "stands tall in scholarship, style and importance ... it is an exceptional study of one of the darkest failures of the New York Times..."
Prof. David S. Wyman, author of The Abandonment of the Jews, praised Buried by the Times as "the best book yet about American media coverage of the Holocaust, and an extremely important contribution to our understanding of America's response to the mass murder of the Jews."
The David S. Wyman Institute for Holocaust Studies, located on the campus of Gratz College near Philadelphia, is a research and education institute focusing on America's response to the Holocaust
As much as prominent Jewish leftists want to deny it, most Jews, at least the ones I know, HATE and BOYCOTT the NYT. Yes, we believe in a liberal media too.
The NYT used to be Republican at one point.
I wonder what is said in the book about the "influence" of the FDR administration on what most newspapers printed?
How many damn memorials do we need?
The Holocaust has been franchised to the point that it should be renamed McMassacre.
It has now become a pathetic, generic symbol of "man's inhumanity to man" with the Jewish experience during that sick period slowly sinking into the muddle of McVictimization.
The Holocaust is becoming a shield in which modern day Jew haters can defend themselves from claims of Anti-Semitism while bashing the Jews at the same time.
Do you see a pattern here.
Yep, continuing right up to the present day... Sudanese genocide news, back pages, obscuring the Islamic character of it in every story. Covering up for despotic regimes the world 'round, that should be the new slogan for the NY Times.
Um, wow. I didn't realize all those people weren't worth remembering. Okay, we can all just forget about it now. No big deal. Thank you for putting it all into perspective. /sarcasm
"Holocaust news was consistently relegated to the Times' back pages. Of the 1,186 articles that the Times published during 1939-1945 about Europe's Jews, only 26 (about two percent) of them appeared on the front page, and even those articles "obscured the fact that most of the victims were Jews."
This is unbelievable in context with how just about every day for the past 20 years, the Times features a FRONT PAGE column of the plight of some allegedly mistreated ethnic minority.
This has been an unabashedly anti-Semitic paper for 60 years. And, incredibly, it is gobbled up by most liberal Jews in New York City. Amazing!
In general or what happened in the 30s and 40s in particular?
The 30's and 40's in particular.
No we haven't.
What a profound example of how a paper can direct events by what it prints, and what is suppresses!
The Holocaust has been franchised to the point that it should be renamed McMassacre.
The appropriate way to memorialize the Holocaust is not by building museums, but by building schools, synagogues and yeshivos so that the next generation of Jewish people will be firm in their faith and observance. Not another freakin damn shrine to the dead.
Anti-Semites love Holocaust memorials. They look at the exhibits featuring piles of dead Jews and feel great satisfaction.
FRmail me to be added or removed from this Judaic/pro-Israel ping list.
WARNING: This is a high volume ping list
Holocaust crap ???
No. We respect and honour our dead.
The only genocide NYT will write about is FAKE GENOCIDE, as demonstrated by numerous NYT articles about Bosnia and Kosovo 'genoicides'.
The real genocides such as Ukraine, The Holocaust, Cambodia, Rwanda were downplayed while they happened.
Hehe, sorry, just laughing at a mental picture here...
A jewish cowboy....
Is that a wide-brim skullcap?
Ok, enough with the smart assedness.
I have to agree with you, the Jews I know (though most I know are liberal for some un-goddly reason) admit that the NYT is a liberal media. It's amazing though, that they admit that.
It may be the conservative influences in my area that let most of the liberals I know become incredibly self-aware.
While I agree about the social outlook on it, I think an increased awareness of it will quell the dissenting ranks into understanding what true evil is.
Maybe then they'll (most of them anyway) gain the ability to distiguish between Republican and Nazi. And then furhter (hopefully) recognize that socialism and liberalism were at the heart of nazi-ism.
With any luck, they'll abandon the DNC and come to the Light Side.
The New York Times' deliberate disregard of the Holocaust they knew full well about is clearly explained in "The Abandonment of the Jews", by David S. Wyman, published in 1984. And yes, it talks about how FDR blew off the Holocaust as well.
Duranty, I think, was the man............
And the Silent American Holocaust as well.
It's been completely de-Judaeofied and turned not only into the generic symbol you mention, but also one of what "religion" does to "free-thinking dissenters."
Holocaust-centrism has altered the foundations of Jewishness and made it all but impossible for the Israelis to expel the hostile non-Jews or create a truly Jewish state governed by Halakhah. After all, "what did the Holocaust teach us?"
Funny how the massacres of the ancient Jews by pagans has been completely forgotten or mythologized. After all, those massacres can't be used in the above manner.
And that is why I like Alouette!
If you'd like to be on or off this
Christian Supporters of Israel ping list,
please FR mail me. ~
There failed not ought of any good thing which the LORD had
spoken unto the house of Israel; all came to pass. (Joshua 21:45)
Letter To The President In Support Of Israel ~
'Final Solution,' Phase 2 ~
I wonder if the Slimes will review this book? </irony>
I don't understand. (you). You want, the Holocaust to be thought of as only the massacre of Jews? I guess, that is what you are saying. Not the generic "man's inhumanity to man".
In reality it is both. But the only way that it can be properly remembered and honored, is the old way, that we were taught, (some yrs ago) in school. Back then, people were taught or learned about it, as what they nowadays call a "Hate-Crime".
Haven't you ever heard of Kinky Friedman from Texas?
Is the Times ever going to just die and go away?
What do you mean by the "Silent American Holocaust"?
Apparently not enough. YOU still don't get it...
Churban 'Europa' (the "Holocaust") is part of Jewish history, just like the Egyptian slavery, the conquest of the Holy Land, the destruction of the Temples, etc. It has been detached from Biblical/Jewish history and made a separate, secularist "revelation."
The only legitimate lesson the world can learn from the Holocaust is the evil of opposing HaShem, the True G-d. Sorry, but I utterly reject all secular "morality" and "ethics" whatsoever.
I am sorry that my point is so difficult to understand.
Whether or not the Holocaust has been "de-Judaeified" depends on how one defines Jewishness. It is true that "the Jews'" status as the unique victims of the Holocaust has always been stressed, but who are "the Jews?" Are they the Biblical Israelites who taught G-d's morality to the world while effacing paganism from the Holy Land, or are they merely the victims of chr*stianity, the implication being that they are the victims of religion and morality? My point about the Holocaust being "de-Judaeified" was that it has been detached from Jewish History (by which I mean the history that begins at Creation and forms the heart of the Bible) and made into a foundational myth of secularism.
But if you didn't understand this the first time, you won't understand it this time either. I hope to write an essay on this subject at my web site in the near future, be`ezrat HaShem.
I refuse to believe that the reason for this is native American anti-Semitism. It is more likely an appreciation of the horrors of 1914-1918 that tempered American attitudes toward military involvement on the Continent.
More commmonly known as Abortion.
....well....it is obvious, you can tell, I'm not Jewish. The fact that I've always loved people who are Jewish, and had friends of same, wouldn't matter a whit to you, I'm sure.
Just tell me, what is this thing with G-d. the hyphen in the middle of the word God? And below that another writer types chr*stianity, in his post.
Anyway, I still say, that it's education that makes the difference in how a historical event is thought of and remembered. I've been taught or brought up to believe that yes, it was six million Jews that perished in that horror. But, yes, they are my sisters and brothers, also.
"New York Times publisher Arthur Sulzberger, an assimilated Jew of German descent, feared that the newspaper would be engaging in special pleading..."
The reason is "special pleading"??? What in the heck is that?
“Anti-Semites love Holocaust memorials. They look at the exhibits featuring piles of dead Jews and feel great satisfaction.”
I never looked at it that way. I just knew I didn’t like going to them. I think you’re right, though.
It’s like the Catholic Church always showing Jesus dead, nailed to the cross where they can control Him.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.