Deafening silence


By Jenni Frazer
July 25, 2011
Share

The United Synagogue has a website called You and US, from which this week the aroma of sour grapes can be detected.
It reprints on the site a letter from the registrar of the London Beth Din, David Frei, in response to a news story in the previous week's JC. This contribution is headed "Silence is Golden from the JC." It has already elicited one comment from someone signing himself "Creative Genus" [sic], applauding the US's move, which was made because the JC turned the letter down for publication.
Now it is perfectly true that the US is entitled to use its own website for its own purposes. What is unfair is that the US did not tell its readers the reason the JC refused to publish Mr Frei's letter.
Our reporter had repeatedly, over a period of a week, attempted to get David Frei to talk to us in order to reflect the position of the Beth Din in a complicated story about a get.
Mr Frei was given every opportunity to speak to us, but chose not to do so. Instead, he sent a letter for publication after the story had appeared. This is called having it both ways, and the JC was not prepared to allow him this privilege.
So US members who look at its website are only getting half a story. They might want to suggest to David Frei and, indeed, members of the Beth Din, that a more direct response to a legitimate media enquiry would be far more productive than this kind of behaviour.

COMMENTS

Joe Millis

Mon, 07/25/2011 - 14:50

Rate this:

0 points

As they say in Yiddish: plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose


Advis3r

Mon, 07/25/2011 - 15:18

Rate this:

-2 points

Why do you consider that it is appropriate to attack Mr Frei in this way - however why should I be surprised since it is not much different from what we have come to expect from the JC. "This is called having it both ways," yes you print a story and then refuse the Beth Din a right of reply in the format it wishes to give it. Mr Frei was under no obligation to give you an interview presumably fearing in view of the complexity of the matter that it was open to misinterpretation so he provided a written response which you refused to print because he refused to tow your line. So you now attack him personally on your website. Nice!


Jenni Frazer

Mon, 07/25/2011 - 15:27

Rate this:

2 points

No, I am not attacking David Frei personally.
I am simply pointing out that he had every opportunity to respond at the time that the news story was being worked on, but he chose not to do so. You presume that he "feared in view of the complexity of the matter that it was open to misinterpretation." Nice presumption.
In fact, he wouldn't even come to the phone. If he had provided his written response at the time, we would have used it. He did not. That's why it's called having it both ways.
Oh, and by the way, if there were a line, he would be refusing to toe it, not tow it. But there isn't.


Advis3r

Mon, 07/25/2011 - 15:48

Rate this:

-2 points

Ms Frazer have you ever noticed that "w" and "e" are next to each other on the keyboard and that I might (as I did) have made a typographical rather than a grammatical one - silly me the JC never do that do they?

"That the Beth Din somewhat hastily paid off the outstanding amount itself may be a testament to the fact that it knew it had done the wrong thing." Nice presumption.


Jenni Frazer

Mon, 07/25/2011 - 15:52

Rate this:

2 points

In this case, Advis3r, please accept that I know the details, and you — since, as far as I am aware, you live in the West Bank and are not privy to the inner workings of the Beth Din and what they did and did not do with regard to this particular story — do not. Unless, of course, we are all working under a massive presumption.


JC Webmaster

Mon, 07/25/2011 - 15:54

Rate this:

1 point

Comments for this page are now closed.

LATEST COMMENTS