All Hail to Who?
Granted that in the privacy of my home, I, airily perhaps, am known, with my wife’s enthusiastic acquiescence, as The King. As a devout practitioner of discretion, however, it is a tightly held title that only has been disclosed to the readers of this newspaper and several hundred relatives.
Returning to the scenic hilltop in Rancho Palos Verdes, Rabbi Jeret wrote a complaining letter of towering importance that transcends Yiddishkeit and affects all readers. He criticized the Religion Editor of The Jewish Journal for three errors of varying degrees of grossness. Sloppily, she misspelled his first name and his last name. Shrewdly, she did not even venture a guess at his middle initial. Unaccountably, she got the rabbi’s job wrong by a mile. Worse than these two demonstrable gaffes, and more problematically, Rabbi Jeret charged the Religion Editor, no kid, with betraying his trust. Since the error-prone Religion Editor was dead wrong about Rabbi Jeret’s first name, last name and the place where he works, I am inclined to believe him over her when he said she disregarded his request to reply “no comment” on a volatile subject.
Proper Work for Gay Boy or Girl?
On the occasion of Stanford Prof. Arnold Eisen being named Chancellor of the Jewish Theological Seminary, the principal institution of Conservative Judaism, the Religion Editor interviewed five Conservative rabbis in Los Angeles. Early stories in the Jewish press on Prof. Eisen’s selection centered on his view of whether openly gay men and women should be ordained, a subject that has roiled the Conservative movement for a number of years. Writing in the April 28 edition of The Jewish Journal, the Religion Editor led off her reaction story by quoting Rabbi Jeret extensively on the subject of ordaining gays. Rabbi Jeret hardly is the most prominent rabbi in Los Angeles, an honor reserved for David Wolpe ever since he came to Sinai Temple in the last century. Curiously, Rabbi Wolpe is quoted at the far south end of the Religion Editor’s story. Probably more savvy at handling the media than Rabbi Jeret, Rabbi Wolpe was quoted as saying something innocuous about the new Chancellor, enough to get his name in the newspaper but not enough to cause trouble.
They Were True, but…
In his letter to the editor, Rabbi Jeret acknowledges that the statements attributed to him about ordination of gays are accurate. But the statements are inappropriate, he maintained, because after making them he asked the Religion Editor, instead, to mark him down for “no comment” on ordination of gays. The whole subject is too divisive, he said he told her. “After being repeatedly pressed by (the Religion Editor) on this topic,” Rabbi Jeret wrote, “I stated my reason for not responding in the media, namely that this issue, whatever its resolution, will divide Jews within the movement. I added that public comments from rabbis in the media, while official deliberations continue, may not help to heal our movement.”
Whatever your opinion on the ordination of gays, dear reader, would you not agree that Rabbi Jeret has struck a pose that is both sensitive and eminently sensible?
I regret that I have only withering criticism for the Religion Editor and her judgment. The charge that Rabbi Jeret leveled against the Religion Editor is a serious one that has a deleterious effect on all who write for a living. Wasn’t it interesting that she did not defend herself? Arrogantly, instructively and illuminatingly, The Jewish Journal limited its apology to the following eleven words: “The Journal regrets the errors regarding Rabbi Jeret’s name and title.”
Postscript
For journalists, trust is as sacred of a concept as belief in God is for a rabbi. For many journalists anyway.
