Reflections on our role as reporters
ZEDDY LAWRENCE
IN recent days, my mind has drifted back to 2002 and the furore that surrounded the publication of The Dignity of Difference by the Chief Rabbi of the Commonwealth Lord Jonathan Sacks.
Accused by ultra-Orthodox rabbis in Manchester of heresy for implying that Judaism did not have a monopoly on spiritual truth, Chief Rabbi Sacks eventually admitted some of his statements had been open to misinterpretation and may not have accurately conveyed his personal feelings on the matter. As well as rewriting the controversial passages in the book, he issued a statement saying, “The problem lies in the use I make of words.”
It was not the first time the chief had cause to regret his terminology. A few weeks earlier he had been lambasted for claiming in an interview that events in Israel sometimes made him feel “uncomfortable as a Jew”, and that Israel was forced into postures “incompatible … with our deepest ideals”.
For all the flak he received – and boy was there flak! – the chief was, and is still, held in the highest esteem, and it is a tribute to the man, rather than his “problematical words”, that he invariably pops up in almost every top-10 list of Britain’s most influential and respected public figures.
And so to the present day, and the furore that greeted Rabbi Yosef Feldman’s comments on the matter of child abuse, as reported in The AJN. “Problematical words” indeed. Taken from an email exchange with fellow rabbis, many of his peers have since contacted us to confirm they regarded the comments as halachic conjecture in the context of an academic debate.
Others in the community, however, read them another way and were understandably dismayed by the opinions expressed.
Which is where The AJN came in.
It is interesting to note the praise heaped on the paper when, in campaigning spirit, it lobbies for Gilad Shalit, it exposes anti-Zionist politicians or it forces online bookshops to remove anti-Semitic books from sale on their virtual shelves. Just last week, a Perth-based ticketing agency removed the option “Occupied Palestinian territories” from its drop-down address menu for overseas subscribers after The AJN alerted them to its presence.
As proud inheritors of the title “The Fourth Estate”, nothing fills journalists or newspapers with greater pride than effecting a change in society on behalf of its readers.
But turn that same campaigning zeal within the community, and for those caught up in the spotlight the paper goes from hero to zero.
As a newspaper, we have a duty to represent our readers and take up the baton on their behalf when they feel a grievance towards individuals or institutions that they sense are not acting in their best interests. Likewise, we have a duty to inform our readers of any perceived failings that their leaders may have. As a newspaper and as a journalists, it is our tradition to take a stand.
However, as a newspaper serving a specific community, we face additional responsibilities. One is to promote a sense of unity and pride within that community and in our communal institutions, another is to endeavour to best represent that community to the outside world.
Inevitably, these obligations will occasionally come into conflict, and when these circumstances arise we have to make tough decisions as to which side of this narrow editorial tightrope we should fall on.
Some will welcome our decision and applaud us for our strident stance. Others will feel we have overstepped the mark and condemn us for sensationalism.
We are not the first, nor will we be the last, newspaper to stand accused of this charge. Indeed, in the wake of the allegations that have struck at the heart of the Murdoch media empire in recent weeks, the entire media industry is feeling the heat.
True or not, in the current climate newspapers are perceived as ignoring ethical and sometimes legal boundaries, in their quest to enthral readers and boost sales.
It would be churlish of those of us in the industry to ignore that sentiment. Likewise, it would be churlish of The AJN in particular to turn a blind eye to the feelings of many members of the community about the manner in which we handled the story regarding Rabbi Yosef Feldman.
While we stand by the content of the story, we recognise and fully appreciate that there are those who felt we could have been less forthright and more sensitive in the way we covered it, and we apologise for any unnecessary distress caused.
With Rosh Hashanah fast approaching, it is timely for us all to take stock of our actions over the past few months. The AJN is no exception.
Drawing on our experiences, we must consider our shortcomings, and resolve to do better in the year ahead.
In this instance, if there are those who feel we have been sensationalist, then we must take that lesson on board as we move forward.
For a newspaper, as for rabbis, it is not always easy being all things to all people. But we do our best, just as they do their best.
Whatever was written in our story does nothing to detract from the tremendous contribution both Rabbi Yosef Feldman and his family have made to our community, or the esteem in which he and they are held.
And as with Chief Rabbi Lord Jonathan Sacks, it is Rabbi Feldman’s deeds and purpose that are ultimately the mark of the man, rather than some ill-chosen words.
That being the case, we wish Rabbi Feldman well in all his endeavours and look forward to reporting on his positive impact on the community in the months and years ahead.
Zeddy Lawrence is national editor of The AJN.
comments