tuesday morning quarterback sacked

[rone]

So, Gregg Easterbrook, a fancy-pants brie-eatin' chardonnay-sippin' elitist who makes a living as a writer and editor, was the writer of Tuesday Morning Quarterback on ESPN.com's Page 2 until sometime after last week's entry when he was canned by ESPN.com due to an entry in his Easterblogg in which he brutalizes Quentin Tarantino and his latest movie due to the violence and general lack of substance therein (and in all of Tarantino's oeuvre). So far so good... but then he runs off the rails and starts dissing Miramax, run by some guy named Weinstein, which is owned by Disney, run by some guy named Eisner. Then he points out that they're Jewish, then he talks about the worship of money. His editor lays blame about this whole mess on, among other things, "the hubris of this whole blogging enterprise." Easterbrook has apologized with the unimpressive-sounding, "Of mangling words, I am guilty." The Washington Post's Howard Kurtz has a good collection of quotes (and links thereto). Here's a choice of quotes:

* * * * *

Relying on his limbic system instead of his cerebral cortex, Easterbrook dismisses movie violence as unimaginative, hackneyed, and trite with an argument that is as unimaginative, hackneyed, and trite as you'll ever read.

* * * * *

Easterbrook's case is not helped by other aspects of his apology. In one, he recounts how he joined a particular Presbyterian congregation specifically because it shares facilities and finances with a synagogue. Experienced readers will find it a bit like the old "some of my best friends are" argument.

Worse, in his apology and in an interview with the New York Times Thursday, Easterbrook pointed to a column he wrote last week, assailing Mel Gibson for a history of violent filmmaking while defending his controversial re-creation of the Passion. "I raised the exact same question about a Christian," Easterbrook said Thursday, and "there was not a single peep."

In that same essay, however, he attacked Catholic biblical scholars who have criticized Gibson's script as anti-Semitic, as well as the Anti-Defamation League, which has expressed similar reservations. "The ADL has a financial interest in accusing Gibson of anti-Semitism," he wrote, "as the organization raises money using this charge ... how better to get publicity and pry open checkbooks."

* * * * *

In a statement about the firing yesterday, ESPN called Easterbrook's remarks "highly offensive and intolerable."

A rep for the network said that the decision was made in-house, and not on Eisner's instructions.

* * * * *

Don't forget, kids! Arabs are Semites, too! Fight back against people who use "anti-Semite" in lieu of "anti-Jew".

On a lighter note, Easterbrook's "Disney's CEO, Michael Eisner, is Jewish; the chief of Miramax, Harvey Weinstein, is Jewish" is very evidently a ripoff of Cartman's classic "Spielberg? Jew. Lucas? Jew. Kyle? Jew. Coincidence?"

So what was my point after all this natter? People is dumb. And ESPN should have never canned Easterbrook over this crap, because it obviously didn't affect them — but because Easterbrook named Eisner (and outed him as a Jew! *gasp*), it looks to anyone like good ol' fashioned payback.

Comments

[therobbergirl.livejournal.com]

Forgive me if i don't consider a rabbi an unbiased source in this matter.

Why does bias matter? Just because someone is Jewish doesn't mean that their research and work is flawed. Telushkin is a highly respected source, both inside and outside of Jewish circles.

If Arabs are Semites, then to call a systematic or general hatred of Judaism "anti-Semitism" is, at best, inaccurate.

Take a look at the definition and history of the word rather than parsing it. "Anti-semitism" has always referred to Jews and only recently have some Arabs tried to use its English parts to justify their views. I'll post the relevant section later this evening when I have the book handy.

[ronebofh.livejournal.com]

Well, i don't know Telushkin from Adam, you know?

If "anti-semitism" (i wonder if the lower-case 's' is significant) was meant to refer to anti-Jewish sentiment from the very start, then it was a poorly chosen term, and i wonder if it was chosen in order to further distance Jews from Arabs.

[ronebofh.livejournal.com]

Google, as always, rules (http://www.yahoodi.com/peace/antisemitism.html#nsomeo).

The term "anti­Semite" was coined in Germany in 1879 by Wilhelm Marrih to refer to the anti­Jewish manifestations of the period and to give Jew ­hatred a more scientific sounding name. "Anti­Semitism" has been accepted and understood to mean hatred of the Jewish people.

"More scientific sounding" my ass.

So, fine, 'anti-Semitism' and 'anti-Semite' are valid terms due to over 125 years of usage. They're still inaccurate and confusing terms, and that's why we should call a spade a spade, just so you don't have asshole Arabs and Bobby Fischer and me getting all funny and cute with language.

Common usage... BAH. This is why the common person shouldn't be allowed to use language. If grunts and gestures were good enough 10000 years ago, they're good enough now.

[mmcirvin.livejournal.com]

HULK THINK YOU ANTI-HULK!

[stoneself.livejournal.com]

blame the nazis (this thread is now dead btw).

they also mangled the use of the use of aryan. thousands of years ago some aryans wound up in europe and others wound up on the indian subcontinent. i doubt that hilter had the indian aryans in mind when he was using the term.

[damienw]

Um, I was lead to believe that Marrih introduced anti-Semite as a replacement for Judenhasse because he thought that calling it "Jew-hating" was putting people off their proper duty of discriminating against Jews...

Also, I thought the Arabs were "Hamitic", sons of Ham. There's some joke here, if only I could work it out.

[ronebofh.livejournal.com]

That was the impression that i got by reading stuff yesterday, but it didn't seem crystal-clear. It would be very ironic, in my opinion, if Jews were trying to insist on a term that was originally intended as a euphemism by someone who was bigoted against them.

The Hamites were the Canaanites, as i understand it. Arabs and Jews came from Abraham, who came from Shem.

[sunburn.livejournal.com]

That was the impression that i got by reading stuff yesterday, but it didn't seem crystal-clear. It would be very ironic, in my opinion, if Jews were trying to insist on a term that was originally intended as a euphemism by someone who was bigoted against them.

The term "Queer" has sometimes been embraced in this way by gay people or the gay community, though I haven't seen much of the term in years. Why by queer when you can be gay?

[ronebofh.livejournal.com]

I guess you folks up in Seattle don't get "Queer Eye for the Straight Guy". Then again, that's probably a blessing.

"You kissed a girl! That is so gay!"