Poor Noah Feldman. We feel so sorry for him. Our heart bleeds for him.
So sad, how he was cropped out of that reunion picture. So unfair. Photoshopped or cropped out because his "fiancee was Korean-American. Her presence implied the prospect of something that from the standpoint of Orthodox Jewish law could not be recognized: marriage to someone who was not Jewish. That hint was reason enough to keep us out."
Assertions without facts, always pleasant.
Well, look what unpleasantness we have turned up. Noah Feldman was one of about sixteen freaking people to be left out of that photograph. He knew this two weeks prior to publishing his article, as did the Times which wanted to publish the picture but then didn't because it wouldn't effectively prove their case. After all, he was hardly the only one excluded.
So basically, Feldman misrepresents the school, blackens its name in the papers, feeds us a sob story about how he was cut out of a photograph...and it's all lies.
Still feel sorry for this lying git?
(Hat Tip: Hirhurim)
24 comments:
Wow, real journalism wins again!!
great post
How is he lying exactly? Mistaken - yes. Lying - show me!
Doesn't surprise me. Ahh, but for self-hating Jews.
If he had all of this information before the piece was published would that not make it a lie?
Never mind - I need to learn how to read :)
Sheesh. Jerk.
"Never mind - I need to learn how to read"
Eh, overrated.
Okay, fine. So a newsletter was published without his picture in it. Whatever. The thing is, that even though Feldman knew that it wasn't a matter of being airbrushed out, he still chose to misrepresent what happened with the photo. That's unethical - his entire story loses its premise, not to mention that he is blatantly and maliciously using this to make the school look bad. That was wrong. You can't write a story - even if it's how you perceived how it occurred - and pass it off as the truth if you KNOW that it's false.
Noah Feldman is a sad, confused man-- there's no doubt about it. But "Dirty Lying Git" seems more apropos for the NY Times. Don't they have fact checkers? Maybe someone should hold them accountable for publishing (i.e. perpetuating, putting into the public eye, circulating to millions of readers) defamatory remarks that are wholly untrue. The heck with this unhappy little boy -- the Times PUBLISHED it!
I still simply cannot understand why anybody feels the need to defend Maimonides - they had every right to crop him out of this picture! He was violating [and continues to violate] an issur deoraita. Why should a school leave that in a picture!!!
Why were the other people cropped out? For the same/similar reason that Feldman was?
Too bad. That you can attack the messenger takes attention away from the larger issues, exemplified by the way so many defended Maimonides when they believed the photo had been cropped.
I posted a correction.
Dear Everyone,
I don't know that this has to be said more clearly, but I shall say it anyway.
Maimonides had every right to crop the picture, had they done that. Every right in the world. And I asserted that here.
But for someone to write a piece suggesting Maimonides had maliciously cropped and singled him out of the picture, knowing full well that this was not the case,knowing that the only thing that had happened was that the photographer was unable to fit 60 people into one picture- that is at the height of dishonesty. He left his article that way for a particular reason; would it have the same effect to read, "I and 15 other people were all left out of the photograph, and due to my ego and guilt I immediately assumed it must be because of the suggestion that my fiancee was non-Jewish and I was interested in marrying her?"
No. It would not be as effective. So there was a deliberate misleading and falsification by both Feldman and the times.
If Feldman had wanted to write an honest critique of Modern Orthodoxy, a factual critique designed to enlighten and make others aware of the facts, he could have done so. He instead subtly manipulated his readers through use of evocative and extreme images and words and what is more, deliberately mislead them in his gripping, disturbing beginning to his piece.
This is not the action of a man I could ever respect, and I see absolutely no way for anyone to defend him and claim that his only desire was to demonstrate the problems with Modern Orthodoxy. Obviously his desire was to give payback for a slight that turns out not even to have been a slight.
These are the actions of a man who feels guilty and defensive, not one who is proud of his way of life and broken because others cannot understand him.
Heh. I wonder if Maimonides could file a defamation lawsuit against the Times, since they knew it to be untrue.
Chana,
I agree with your comments of 6:14 except for the part about his guilt.I think it was his arrogance anger and self -entitlement that led him to malign Orthodoxy to the level of his acting unethically and dishonestly.
I wonder if Maimonides could file a defamation lawsuit against the Times, since they knew it to be untrue.
The article never said it was cropped; just that he wasn't in it. I'm not saying it's honest, but it's probably not a lie, technically.
told you so---as i stated before, the issue wasn't orthodoxy, medical practices, maimonides etc etc..
it was always feldman...always his lies and half-truths...this photo revelation (which some had theorized from the beginning) takes this article out of the bogus debate over MO and into Jayson Blair territory. we're talking another major NYT f-up, ombudsman report, apology and termination of whatever deal feldman had with them.
kudos to chani for being first to concentrate on the real issue---and analyze his misleading writing, disingenuousness etc piece by piece.
norm depalma,
Thanks for your comment, but I would prefer you to call me Chana. Thanks!
Diet Dr. Pepper,
NO ONE was cropped out for any reason. The were no pictures of the entire group.
Norm,
Why post under your name (?) here and anonymously on hirhurim?
chana,
sorry bout that...force of habit.
mdj
i had problems posting at hirhurim...tried using 'norm depalma'...didn't work.
By the way, I emailed the below letter to the New York Times Public Editor. I suggest that those who have not sent something similar yet do so. As mentioned below, I try to keep the letter succint, and devoid of any arguments over religion, the content of the piece etc...I believe that this is the best approach. (though obviously 'official' complaints filed by 'official' organizations will carry more weight)
Re. Orthodox Paradox
Dear Sir:
I am sure you have received many letters commenting on this NYT Magazine article in light of the recent revelation by Feldman that he and the New York Times knew that the reunion photo was not altered (and that the omission of Feldman and girlfriend was accidental.) I was wondering if you and the NYT realize how grave an error the Times has committed. Has the paper forgotten Jayson Blair so soon?
Does the paper not realize that the Post, Journal et al will villify it and rightfully so? That it is losing any remaining credibility ?
The Times, for its own good, must own up to its error and take immediate steps:
1) a substantial and detailed apology in the NYT Magazine;
2) the termination of any publishing deal with Feldman. He must not be allowed to write in the paper again.
3) the suspension of supervisory level employees who were aware of the truth regarding the photo.
I have kept this letter short as I do not believe I need to hammer home the obvious. However, if you wish further explanation, i would be glad to do so.
sincerely,
Do you guys actually think it was a coincidence that they used the picture that did not include his wife? As much as one may dislike the article, it was no mistake that she was left out of the picture.
If anything the burden is on the school to prove otherwise because like he said, its entirely consistent with the fact that they also left him off announcements.
While I agree with your assessment of Feldman.. I still maintain that your outrage is misguided. How many dirty lying gittim does the world have? More than we can count! How many get their garbage published and read by millions? Not many!
You said, "These are the actions of a man who feels guilty and defensive, not one who is proud of his way of life and broken because others cannot understand him."
So true.. BUT it was the NYT that gave him a venue to publish the story. It was the NYT that gave him a platform to speak from. It IS the NYT that deliberately promoted these falsehoods. There are lots of misguided, unhappy people in the world -- they only come into the limelight when someone gives them permission to do it.
Why beat up on a man who is already so unhappy and broken? Who really cares? Big Business that promotes the ideas that this unhappy, broken man espouses -- and that generate misunderstanding and hate -- THEY should be held accountable.
So, if you're keeping score at home:
1. Noah never used the word "cropped" but strongly implied that that's what happened.
2. Noah's argument is now that Maimonides should have chosen a picture that cut out some of his classmates so that he and his SO (who didn't go to the school) could appear.
Post a Comment