JustASC

Great catch by Rabbi Jason Miller, who noted the Daily Mail‘s clueless caption on this photo of real estate mogul Jared Kushner and his wife Ivanka Trump:

Miller explains that the Daily Mail first published the photo online with a caption explaining that

Jared, wearing a casual black jacket, pushed little Arabella Rose’s pram along the streets on their way to lunch. He also held some flowers in one hand – perhaps a gift for his wife.

Of course, that’s a lulav in Kushner’s left hand and an etrog box in his right, and the two were apparently on their way to 0r from Sukkot services.

But don’t just pick on the Daily Mail — these kinds of mistakes are more common than you think. A gallery:

The Columbia Journalism Review’s ethicist Lawrence Pintak clocks in on Gilad Shalit’s interview on Egyptian TV, and asks what I had been wondering: “[H]ow many reporters can honestly say that, given the opportunity, they would have turned down the chance to be the first to speak with Shalit? Would Israel TV have said no?”

Pintak’s conclusion: It wasn’t the “get” that was troubling, but its creepy context:

In short, consider the source. Shahira Amin is an anchor at Nile TV, the English-language service of the government-owned station that sanitized the revolution. She spent much of her career communicating the official Mubarak government line and while she resigned amid much fanfare when it was fairly clear the government would fall, she was back at work not long after.

In the Shalit interview, her questions ranged from the illogical to the ridiculous. Why didn’t he do more videos from captivity? What “lessons” did he learn? Would he campaign for the release of Palestinian prisoners? And through it all, she kept fishing for complements [sic] about Egypt’s role in the release.

It was a classic performance by an Arab state broadcaster: one part journalism, two parts propaganda. Habits, after all, are hard to break.

Israeli novelist Amos Oz tends to speak in the kind of tossed off epigrams that only come with a lot of practice. But just when you want to smack him for his breezy erudition, he redeems himself with a flash of spot-on — and hilarious — self-awareness.

Speaking last night at 92nd Street Y about his new novel, Scenes From Village Life, Oz said that 99 percent of the typical media coverage of Israel is settler fanatics, ultra-Orthodox loonies, and brutal soldiers, “and one percent saintly intellectuals like myself.”

And if his answers are rehearsed, what answers they are! Asked why so many of his stories seen so downbeat, he replied, “If I were to sum up my books in one word, I would say they are about ‘families.’ If you gave me two words, I would say ‘unhappy families.’” He added that a bridge that carries thousands of cars each day is no story at all. “It is only when the bridge collapses that the story begins.”

Most countries, he said, are born out of geography,  history,  politics, or demography. Unfortunately for Israel, it was born out of a dream. “The only way to keep a dream intact is never to live it out,” he said. “Israel is a dream come true, and therefore it is disappointing. “ (He’s said the same thing before, but when you have material this good and a body of work as essential as his, you get a pass. Besides, you can’t plagiarize yourself).

Oz read portions from the new book, a novel-in-stories set in the kind of out-of-the-way Israeli village one character compares to Tuscany. The characters, he said, are “small-time dreamers,” lonely, “half-knowing, half-touching.” And of course, this being Oz, there is the temptation to read politics into his prose. Is he symbolically retreating from the public arena? Is he chiding Israel for betraying its past?

“There are political overtones,” he acknowledged. When he tries to deny that, he said, “I am wasting my time. People will see it as an allegory.”

Its Jew vs. Jew again, this time in San Fancisco, this time over — wait for it – cellphone antennas!

A planned upgrade of cellphone antennas at the Bureau of Jewish Education has alarmed parents at the Lisa Kampner Hebrew Academy, the BJE’s neighbor, who have resolved to bring their concerns to the San Francisco Planning Commission.

Last spring, the BJE agreed to allow AT&T Wireless to increase the number of cellphone antennas on its roof, replacing the one that has been in place for 14 years at 639 14th Ave. The school is next door at 645 14th Ave….

“Parents are petrified,” said Rabbi Pinchas Lipner, the academy dean. “Under no condition do they want the antennas to go up, because they are scared for the safety of their children.”

By the way, did you hear about the wedding between two radio antennas? The reception was great.

Investigative journalist Richard Behar, who edited the hell out of my college newspaper, has an angry update on Gilad Shalit’s interview with Egyptian ”journalist”  Shahira Amin. Rich refutes Amin’s assertion that the  interview was conducted “after he had been released by Hamas and had a medical checkup by the Red Cross.”

But here’s the problem: Red Cross spokesman Hicham Hassan wrote me today that “ICRC representatives met Mr. Shalit briefly after his transfer to the Egyptian authorities. However, he was not met by an IRC doctor as this has [sic] not been solicited.”

This is no small detail: The issue of Shalit’s medical condition (physical and mental) lies at the very heart of why the interview should never have taken place.  So does the fact that a masked Hamas soldier – from the group’s armed wing – stood with a camera in that interview room. Just how “released” could Shalit have felt at that moment – in an Israel-unfriendly country such as Egypt – to freely consent to an interview?  Considering that masked Hamas men were the only people he could see for five years, did he feel he was in any position to say no?

The Occupy Wall Street movement demands an update of the old Milton Himmelfarb chestnut: The Jews earn like the 1 percent, but vote like the 99 percent.

See, for example, Ynet’s breathless article about American Jewish wealth, whose title seems to have been cut and paste from a White Power web site: “How did American Jews get so rich?” Consider:

A study of the Pew Forum institute from 2008 found that Jews are the richest religious group in the US: Forty-six of Jews earn more than $100,000 a year, compared to 19% among all Americans. Another Gallup poll conducted this year found that 70% of American Jews enjoy “a high standard of living” compared to 60% of the population and more than any other religious group.

More than 100 of the 400 billionaires on Forbes’ list of the wealthiest people in America are Jews. Six of the 20 leading venture capital funds in the US belong to Jews, according to Forbes.

Combine that with today’s Times story about income distribution in New York, which asserts that “the protesters picked the right city in which to start their campaign”:

Among the 1 percent of American households with the highest income, a significant portion, 13 percent, live in the New York metropolitan area, with 4.4 percent living in Manhattan, according to an analysis by Andrew A. Beveridge, a sociologist at Queens College. In three Manhattan neighborhoods, the Upper East and Upper West Sides and Greenwich Village, more than 11 percent of the households make enough to qualify for the top 1 percent.

Not that all New Yorkers are Jewish (sorry, Lenny). But, well, you know.

The trumped-up charges of anti-Semitism nothwithstanding (not withstanding scrutiny, that is), it’s probably safe to say that more Jews than not are among the “almost half of the public [who] thinks the sentiment at the root of the Occupy movement generally reflects the views of most Americans.”

Which puts Jews both in the crosshairs of the occupy movement and inside the parks, shouting out.

This is sort of funny, the way the decline of Western civilization is sort of funny:

Two conservative groups have rejected the joint appeal from two national Jewish organizations to sign a “unity pledge” on how to treat Israel in political debate.

“An open and vigorous debate on the questions confronting our country is the cornerstone of the American electoral process,” the Republican Jewish Coalition said in a statement. “Allowing the American people to see where candidates stand, pro and con on critical issues, is the hallmark of our free and democratic political system.”

The Emergency Coalition for Israel also rejected last week’s pledge proposal by the American Jewish Committee and the Anti-Defamation League.

“This attempt to silence those of us who have ‘questioned the current administration’s foreign policy approach vis-a-vis Israel’ will re-energize us,” the coalition said in a statement. “Nor, incidentally, should those who support the administration’s approach to Israel be bashful about making their case.”

In other words, the two partisan Republican groups want to be as nasty as they want to be in the run-up to the 2012 election. Which, I agree, is their right.

The ADL, meanwhile, clarifies its stance:

The pledge is not intended to discourage raising questions about a candidate’s support for Israel or the policy decisions of the current administration regarding Israel. In fact, ADL has been outspoken in questioning and even criticizing U.S. policies and positions toward Israel during the last three years. We will continue to raise concerns about those policies and positions when we believe it is warranted, just as we will be supportive when we feel that is appropriate.

M.J. Rosenberg, meanwhile, takes the measure of ECI:

ECI is not really about Israel. It is all about defending the political and economic interests of its millionaire donors by electing Republicans. That means smearing Democrats who might raise its sponsors’ taxes. And it means lying about the Occupy Wall Street movement which defends working people and excoriates the 1 percent Theodore Roosevelt called “malefactors of great wealth.”

Gov. Chris Christie met today with Israel’s ambassador to the United States (and former Jersey guy) Michael Oren, and announced he’ll be visiting Israel next spring. (Wait — I thought he wasn’t running for president?)

Here’s a video:

Always sad (and ominous) to see the death of a Jewish newspaper, this one in Portland, Ore.:

In an email to the community Oct. 10, the Jewish Federation of Greater Portland announced that it will cease publication of the Jewish Review following publication of the Jan. 1, 2012, edition….

Federation has spent more than $1 million of communal resources in maintaining the operations of the newspaper over the past six years, noted the announcement that continued, “ By no longer publishing the Jewish Review, federation will free up an estimated $100,000 per year to fund other worthwhile communal needs and endeavors.”

An additional factor in the decision was the fact that a new publishing group recently informed the federation that it intends to launch a new Portland-focused Jewish lifestyles monthly magazine in January.

Read between the lines, and it looks like the federation is backing the new magazine venture – probably offering them its mailing list and a smaller subvention than they were paying for their own newspaper.

Coincidentally or not, this announcement follows news that the Portland Jewish community is bigger than many observers thought.

Israeli bloggers miffed at Prime Minister Netanyahu’s high profile during the Gilad Shalit release have started a site devoted to “BibiBombs” — with Netanyahu showing up Zelig-style at historically opportune moments. (You can read about it in Hebrew at Globes.) Enjoy:

(H/t Larry Yudelson)