Cathy Young vs. Eric Alterman, Round 3

Nick Gillespie | February 21, 2005

Not exactly the Thrilla in Manila, but the brouhaha betwixt Eric Alterman and Reason's own Cathy Young, in which charges of Jewish self-hatred and not-quite-anti-semitism flew with the power of Frazier and Ali body blows, continues. For rounds 1 and 2, go here and here.

And now Alterman writes me:

Since you published Cathy Young's stupid and slanderous article about me, perhaps you would also like to publish the views of the Globe's ombudman as well as three of the many letters it received in reaction to the piece.

Well, I'll let readers find whatever letters they want to. Here's what the Boston Globe's ombudsman had to say.

And here's Alterman's bit on his Altercation blog at MSNBC.

For the record, I think the Globe is dead wrong to suggest that Cathy Young's col "was not up to op-ed page standards" and that it was negatively "blog-like in its narrow, personal focus -- not worthy of an opinion page where readers expect (and usually get) thoughtful analysis and insight." Young's col, which we were glad to reprint here, is absolutely thoughtful and insightful, and so were her responses to the perpetually aggrieved Alterman.

Comments

|2.21.05 @ 10:12AM|#

Who the fuck cares about Eric Alterman? I just perused his columns. This is clearly a man no longer in touch with reality. He's a fuckin' nut-job!

|2.21.05 @ 10:48AM|#

What strikes me first is this sentence from Young: "There is, for instance, the way Alterman not-so-deftly conflates Muslims with Arabs and Arabs with dispossessed Palestinians, and then declares Jews responsible for "much" of the suffering of Muslims everywhere."

It's simply not true. Whatever you think of Alterman's column, he never said or implied "Muslims everywhere."

As a side note, I know Reason, as a pub with a viewpoint, has a hard line to walk, and I appreciate that it allows for diverse viewpoints, but I have trouble believing that Young's column using cheap emotional tactics to engender support for one of the world's most aggressive police states is in any way relevant to - or even not antithetical to - a libertarian perspective.

digamma|2.21.05 @ 10:51AM|#

What's "blog-like" about the whole brouhaha is the endless parsing and reparsing of words to see who should be more shocked, SHOCKED, at the other's comments.

|2.21.05 @ 11:03AM|#

ews,

"It's simply not true. Whatever you think of Alterman's column, he never said or implied 'Muslims everywhere.'"

Yeah, actually he did imply it:

"To ask Arabs to participate in a ceremony that does not recognize their own suffering but implicitly endorses the view that caused their catastrophe is morally idiotic."

The "Arabs" (that is, Muslims) in question are from Britain, yet Alterman refers to "their own suffering" and "their catastrophe." Does Israel have settlements on the Thames?

|2.21.05 @ 11:10AM|#

. . . cheap emotional tactics to engender support for one of the world's most aggressive police states is in any way relevant to - or even not antithetical to - a libertarian perspective.



Israel--one of the world's most aggressive police states?!

I don't recall anything Cathy wrote that made me want to support Israel. On the other hand, the above comments do make me want to support Israel. Let's send 'em some more F-15s, or maybe a few F-22s . . .

|2.21.05 @ 11:55AM|#

Seems to me like the ombudsman's comments were a straightforward ad hominem attack on blogs.

sage|2.21.05 @ 12:52PM|#

I think one of them's afraid and the other's glad of it.

s.m. koppelman|2.21.05 @ 1:25PM|#

When I got to the line that read 'For the record, I think the Globe is dead wrong to suggest that Cathy Young's col "was not up to op-ed page standards"', I thought the punchline was going to be that Ms. Young's crappy column was no crappier than hundreds of other lazy and vindictive columns that make it onto op-ed pages every week.

Too bad.

|2.21.05 @ 1:33PM|#

*YAWN* You're kidding. We're still on this?!?

You go, ombudsman.

This whole catfight is really amusing in light of Young's current piece on who's pushing morals. "How dare anyone not regard the Auschwitz commemoration as sacrosanct" sounds an awful lot like someone pushing their morals with aggressive hostility to me.

|2.21.05 @ 1:55PM|#

Cathy Young is certainly one of reason's best writers. I believe, however, that this particular Globe peice came so soon after the absolutely amazing Ayn Rand cover, that her writing juices were still pretty much used up at the time.

Unfortunately "reason", in its understandable urge to say "see, our guys also write for mainstream media that you have heard of," seems a bit too eager to defend the quality of the peice.

Every writer, even one as talented as Cathy Young, occasionally writes something that's not quite up to par. It's natural. Might as well admit you're human and move on to writing other great things - such as her current column on moral authoritarianism.

|2.21.05 @ 1:56PM|#

Cathy Young is certainly one of reason's best writers. I believe, however, that this particular Globe peice came so soon after the absolutely amazing Ayn Rand cover, that her writing juices were still pretty much used up at the time.

Unfortunately "reason", in its understandable urge to say "see, our guys also write for mainstream media that you have heard of," seems a bit too eager to defend the quality of the peice.

Every writer, even one as talented as Cathy Young, occasionally writes something that's not quite up to par. It's natural. Might as well admit you're human and move on to writing other great things - such as her current column on moral authoritarianism.

|2.21.05 @ 2:16PM|#

I have trouble believing that Young's column using cheap emotional tactics to engender support for one of the world's most aggressive police states is in any way relevant to - or even not antithetical to - a libertarian perspective.

Israel is a police state? Well, between the universal suffrage, elected parliment and adversarial mainstream press, I must have missed that. Why, we have only two of those things, we must be even worse than they are. No wonder they're our great allies.

|2.21.05 @ 11:02PM|#

Everyone under Israeli jurisdiction gets to vote. Except the ones who don't.

The deterioration of Cathy Young's columns over the last year or so has been disappointing, and this was the worst yet.

And the ombudsman was right - op-ed pieces, unlike blogs, usually try to argue some sort of point, not just quote somebody and spend a few 'graphs saying "OMG!"

|2.22.05 @ 5:45AM|#

Will somebody please Fedex Mr. Alterman his gerbil's head so he'll have something real to cry about? Jesus, what a weenie.

|2.22.05 @ 8:42AM|#

Cathy:

"he seems to regard the creation of Israel itself�not just the occupation of the West Bank and Gaza�as an Arab "catastrophe.""


Yeah, how dare the Palestinians consider the creation of Israel, which in turn ethnically cleansed them, a catastrophe.

|2.22.05 @ 3:00PM|#

No no, a, they were not cleansed, or expelled, or any such thing. Millions of Palestinians Arabs, of their own accord and completely without coercion, decided that their ancestral cities really sucked, and what they really wanted to do was raise their children in refugee camps.

|2.23.05 @ 10:15AM|#

Just in case you haven't had enough of Young v. Alterman, their sniping has a history.