Read on Twitter
A few words on how the media has abandoned its mission, overtly engages in advocacy, even to the point where it highlights and pushes bigoted messages about people (minorities) they consider to be the out-group, and that they will come for you too.
Let's discuss The NY Times.
Let's discuss The NY Times.
We should not be surprised at all the the New York Times allows the same small group of people to dishonestly attack the successful Yeshiva system, which gives our kids the tools to live in this world while maintaining the value system we've held dear for thousands of years.
As I've said so many times, it's the unique culture we maintain that they can't stand. This has nothing to do with earning power, or education.
And you don't have to take my word or it.
And you don't have to take my word or it.
At the very same time they began selling this – a real "Big Lie," Pew told me Ultra-Orthodox Jews were 3 times as likely to earn $150K than the general population was.
So what is the real issue here, and why do outlets like the New York Times keep allowing this tiny – but extremely well-funded – group of a dozen rabble rousers to keep pushing these lies despite the fact they represent nobody?
This is also verifiable.
This is also verifiable.
Check it out. It's the same few people being fronted by the same bogus organization, whose Executive Director makes a habit out of publicly acting in bad faith and in smearing all aspects of the community – not just on the education issue.
They have the means to hire top-tier PR firms (for example: they are currently a client of Anat Gerstein) to get placement & coverage, regurgitating the same lie over & over.
Funny how this same crew always goes straight to attacking people who stand up to them as "PR hacks."
Funny how this same crew always goes straight to attacking people who stand up to them as "PR hacks."
But great PR help (and Anat Gerstein is one of the best there is) should only be able to get you so far.
If the Times would care about accuracy even a bit, they would tell you when NYS asked for public comment on this issue, about 140,000 letters came in against this effort.
If the Times would care about accuracy even a bit, they would tell you when NYS asked for public comment on this issue, about 140,000 letters came in against this effort.
Again, 140,000 individual letters.
Against what this group is advocating for.
Did the Times ever look to publish a video of the side of the issue these 140,000 people stand for?
Against what this group is advocating for.
Did the Times ever look to publish a video of the side of the issue these 140,000 people stand for?
Let's also discuss the extremely low editorial standards they have for this sort of material.
They ran an "opinion" video today, which purports to give a mother's perspective on Hasidic education and a plea to politicians to follow the law and enforce "standards."
They ran an "opinion" video today, which purports to give a mother's perspective on Hasidic education and a plea to politicians to follow the law and enforce "standards."
First - allowing framing of whatever beef this mother has about her child's specific school (and I'm generally skeptical of all claims made in the context of a divorce/custody battle) as indicative of the over 50,000 Yeshiva students currently in New York State.
Stereotype much?
Stereotype much?
That's bigoted, pure & simple.
The Times will allow you to make broad sweeping generalizations about certain minorities without evidence – if you pick on the right ones.
"The Ultra-Orthodox Jewish school" "The boys in my community are" "politicians are afraid of the community."
The Times will allow you to make broad sweeping generalizations about certain minorities without evidence – if you pick on the right ones.
"The Ultra-Orthodox Jewish school" "The boys in my community are" "politicians are afraid of the community."
Next, the assertion that the NYC Dept of Education said "only two out of the 28 schools it investigated met these requirements" is presented that way to lead the reader to believe that fewer than 10% of Yeshivas teach secular studies.
This is untrue as well.
This is untrue as well.
1)See, there are nearly 300 Yeshivas in New York City alone.
The organization pushing this put together a list of 39 schools (40 sites) they said were the worst offenders.
2)NYCDOE investigated them all. 12 were either nonexistent (one a butcher shop!) or taught post-HS.
The organization pushing this put together a list of 39 schools (40 sites) they said were the worst offenders.
2)NYCDOE investigated them all. 12 were either nonexistent (one a butcher shop!) or taught post-HS.
3)These are the actual findings from the investigation. Even the "only 2 schools" is a dishonest frame.
11/28 were at or near equivalence.
12/28 were actively working toward equivalence.
5/28 were not.
11/28 were at or near equivalence.
12/28 were actively working toward equivalence.
5/28 were not.
But it isn't really 5/28. It's 5/300.
But for the Times, which doesn't want you, Jewish or not, to be able to choose how you want to educate your children, using 2/28 as the frame is much better than 295/300.
Remember, it's not only about Hasidic Jews. https://www.dailywire.com/news/steinberg-attacks-on-orthodox-jewish-education-ought-to-frighten-everyone
But for the Times, which doesn't want you, Jewish or not, to be able to choose how you want to educate your children, using 2/28 as the frame is much better than 295/300.
Remember, it's not only about Hasidic Jews. https://www.dailywire.com/news/steinberg-attacks-on-orthodox-jewish-education-ought-to-frighten-everyone
The dishonest framing they allow lets you know what they despise – and it is you. They say it's about educational neglect, but it's not. If it were, they would focus on fixing sub-par schools, instead of trying to destroy the very idea of educational independence.
It is certainly about educational independence. If not, why are all the schools she lists as providing adequate secular studies also vehemently opposing the regulations she advocates for? https://www.timesunion.com/news/article/Catholic-schools-will-boycott-new-13458470.php
There's a good reason for this. Take a quick look at what they wanted the state to implement.
As Ed Mechmann, director of public policy for the archdiocese of New York wrote in December of 2018, "There's a name for schools that are subject to this kind of control by the government – public schools."
http://web.archive.org/web/20190910044340/https://archny.org/news/religious-schools-are-under-attack
http://web.archive.org/web/20190910044340/https://archny.org/news/religious-schools-are-under-attack
The idea of a private school – of a child being brought of differently than they want the child to be brought up – is what bugs them.
It's why they turn to a law which was put on the books explicitly to stamp out religious "others" to get what they want. https://www.educationnext.org/new-york-education-law-rooted-anti-catholic-animus/
It's why they turn to a law which was put on the books explicitly to stamp out religious "others" to get what they want. https://www.educationnext.org/new-york-education-law-rooted-anti-catholic-animus/
And all this takes place in the shadow of physical violence against visibly Orthodox Jews.
The Times doesn't care about how they contribute to it. Because to them, anyone who resists the modern culture are the untermenschen. https://forward.com/opinion/430477/no-one-cares-about-attacks-against-the-orthodox-because-youve-been/
The Times doesn't care about how they contribute to it. Because to them, anyone who resists the modern culture are the untermenschen. https://forward.com/opinion/430477/no-one-cares-about-attacks-against-the-orthodox-because-youve-been/
Palate cleanser: here's the kind of tweet the Executive Director of YAFFED has "liked," if you want an idea of where his head is really at:
