You don't expect to see a giant in hysterics. But that's how the New York Times international edition came across when it canceled all future editorial cartoons from its pages because readers saw one as anti-Semitic. Few will likely agree with this writing, particularly my fellow Jews: I don't get what the fuss is about. Even the Times' cartoon editor didn't spot the offense when he chose to publish it.
Is there ethnic prejudice in a Trump/Netanyahu parody?
The offending cartoon showed a caricature of Benjamin Netanyahu acting like a seeing-eye dog leading a blind Donald Trump.
If it weren't for an identifying marking on the dog collar - a Star of David – the pooch could just as well be Vladimir Putin or Kim Jong-un leading our president around. Rather than anti-Semitism, I see anti-Trump-ism, or maybe anti-Netanyahu-ism, or even anti-Israel-ism; but Jew-hating? Nah. Those who object overlook the politics of the day. Neither leader is popular in his country. According to a Times of Israel poll taken June 11, a majority of the Israeli people (56 percent), think their Prime Minister should step down, Reportedly, he's about to be indicted in three criminal cases against him and his countrymen oppose legislation that would grant him immunity while in office. Sound familiar?
A distinction without a difference
Similarities between these two leaders are stark. The Hill reports that nearly half of Americans (48 percent) want Trump impeached. And as for Trump blindly following Netanyahu, his flip-flop over Jewish settlements in Israel makes the point. At first. Trump said they were bad for peace with the Palestinians.
But then just before meeting with Netanyahu, he flip-flopped.
Where's Charlie Hebdo when you need him?
As for the Times' decision to stop publishing editorial cartoons, how terror-stricken was that? Consider the Charlie Hebdo horror in Paris four years ago. This weekly magazine took a hit - two terrorist attacks, one in 2011 and the other in 2015 in which 12 of the staff were murdered: All because of Muhammed sendups like the caricature of the founder of saying, “100 lashes if you don't die of laughter.” And here's the thing, Charlie Hebdo didn't stop publishing cartoons after the attacks.
The magazine continues to publish every Wednesday.
Is this the beginning of the end?
Even if I take it on faith that the Netanyahu/Trump joke is anti-Semitic, why should cartooning be banned over one noxious work? James Bennet, editor for the newspaper's page said in a statement that the decision to eliminate all political cartoons had nothing to do with the one in question. He said it was made a year ago “to be in line with the domestic pages,” which don't carry cartoons. But the Times' longtime cartoonist, Patrick Chappatte wrote on his website that the newspaper's decision was directly linked to the cartoon. And he's worried that “moralistic mobs” will pressure other publications to knuckle. I'm worried, too. If editorial cartoons are going away, can editorial pages be far behind?
