The
New York Times piece, too, mentions its main characterās aggression against Israeli Jews, but as a side note. Readers learn that Refaat Alareer, the Islamic University of Gaza poetry professor featured in the piece, āfrequently writes furious barrages that describe Israel as a source of evil.ā And the reporter, Jerusalem bureau chief Patrick Kingsley, quotes Alareer defending terrorism targeting Israeli civilians.
These, however, are mere foils in a story that overwhelmingly portrays the Palestinian professor in a flattering light. The piece claims that Alareer, through his teaching of poetry, adds ānuanceā to contrasting narratives; that he is a āchampionā of Israeli verse; and that he offers students an āappreciationā of Jewish poets who show the humanity of the other side. Itās a feel-good story celebrating an unlikely bridge-builder.
Alareer, though, is hardly the hero he is made out to be. He isā¦
Something else. Jews, though, are increasingly cautious in our use of the term āantisemite,ā lest an antisemite accuse us of āweaponizingā the word to āsilenceā mere ācriticismā of Israel. So it may be safer to simply quote the professorās ramblings and let the reader decide. Alareer is the type of person who
writes on Twitter: āAre most Jews evil? Of course they are.ā He is the type who writes: āYou Jew wonāt understand, you will never, you are a Jew after all.ā (Typos corrected for readability.)
The professor was eventually kicked off of Twitter, though we canāt be sure if it was due to his anti-something-ism. What we do know is that, when he later returned under a different user name, Alareer was more circumspect, and even managed to avoid explicitly demonizing āJewsā as evil.
Instead, he relied on the familiar
euphemism, writing, for example, that ā[Z]ionism and zionazism are the root cause of evilā around the world; that āZionists are scumā; that āZionists are the most despicable filthā; and that āZionism is a disease.ā (And still, the Z-word can make for a flimsy disguise, as when Alareer wrote in reference to Jews in Nazi concentration camps, āZios are the dirtiest little snitches everā¦. No wonder many of them kapoed like bitches.ā)
Furious barrages, indeed. Few should be surprised, then, that the
New York Timesās premise about Alareer ā that in the classroom he is different; the archetype of a noble professor; a bridge across the stormy divide ā turned out to be
an utter fabrication.
Shortly after the newspaper published its hagiography, the media monitoring organization CAMERA uncovered
video of Alareer spewing hate from the university lectern, demonizing Zionists, and slandering the same Israeli poets he was said to have praised.
The
Times, at least, responded appropriately to the discovery, appending a 267-word editorsā note to the piece that closed with a striking
mea culpa: āIn light of this additional information, editors have concluded that the article did not accurately reflect Mr. Alareerās views on Israeli poetry or how he teaches it. Had The Times done more extensive reporting on Mr. Alareer, the article would have presented a more complete picture.ā
But it didnāt do more extensive reporting. Instead, the paper was too quick to whitewash and glamorize an anti-Jewish hatemonger.
(full article online)
As 2021 came to a close, two of the most influential news organizations in the English-speaking world, the New York Times and the BBC,
www.camera.org
honestreporting.com
