That's not quite what I meant. You are suggesting that I said it is journalism of the highest order to give both sides equal time/column inches to make their point. I certainly don't think that.What I wrote is actually this:NJJS will have to do the same and theyÌ¢‰â‰ã¢ll be better off for it. TheyÌ¢‰â‰ã¢ve stumbled into a great story here, actually. The follow-up articles in the coming weeks, if they pull this off right, can be examples of journalism of the highest order.My point is that they screwed up in the first place, but that in coverage of their community that will result from the screw-up will be good journalism. That is not to say that if both the bigots and everyone else gets to say whatever the hell they want, good journalism will be enjoyed by all. Rather, if what they've stumbled into here is a legitimate concern of their readers--I mean the concern of the majority of their readers, not the loud rabbinical cabal of a minority that tried to bully the newspaper into pretending reality isn't the way it is here in NJ--they'll get great stories out of it.I am saying that if they cover their own screw-up well, that will be good journalism.

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and email addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

Donate

Help us elevate the voices of Jewish women.

donate now

Get JWA in your inbox

Read the latest from JWA from your inbox.

sign up now