Winnipeg Limousine
Telexperts
Israel Bonds
Monica Hirsch
Tall Grass 3rd Location
Ben Gurion University Canada
Insight Service Solutions
DeNardi

Re: QUESTION FOR BARTLEY KIVES, RE ANTISEMITIC POSTERS : HOW MANY ANTISEMITIC EMAILS DID YOU GET?

by | Sep 18, 2012

Re: QUESTION FOR BARTLEY KIVES, RE ANTISEMITIC POSTERS : HOW MANY ANTISEMITIC EMAILS DID YOU GET? by Rhonda Spivak, September 16, 2012

I anxiously await your update and/or correction to the above mentioned piece, considering that the Winnipeg Free Press did in fact publish a comprehensive article focused entirely on the anti-Semitic nature of these posters and the ongoing investigation (Sept 16, by Geoff Kirbyson). The decision whether to publish the exact text or a photo on the poster is, as you surely understand, an editorial choice – possibly one made easier in this case as a result of the journalist actually doing the job of a journalist by getting the story.

Per the attached link, one can read the entire WFP article (entitled ‘Anti-Semitic, a Hate Crime’) and the author’s interview with David Matas who, in his capacity as B’nai Brith legal counsel, addresses both the specific anti-Semitic details contained in the posters as well as the broader implications of anti-Jewish hate speech. Furtherreactions and quotes from Mayor Katz and businessman Earl Barish (both mentioned on the poster) are also included.

 
To suggest that the WFP shied away from covering the anti-Semitic details of this case, or that Mr. Kives is gagged by his employer is, at best, a stretch. It’s just as possible that Mr. Kives declined to comment on your story because his focus is on investigating the facts and ramifications of this case rather than replying to unsubstantiated conjecture of the Winnipeg Police Services’ hate-on for Jews, a premise apparently based solely on an initial press release that didn’t scream ‘hate crime’.

As you said in your article, "I am posting a photo of this disgusting poster because I want to make sure that all of my readers have a chance to see it–and be shocked by it." The facts of this case are chilling enough without your readers requiring additional shock value.

Arthur Liffman

Editor’s Response:

I want to respond to a couple of the points in your letter.

If you are trying to say that I ought not have published a photo of the poster, since in your words "the facts of this case are chilling enough," I want you to know that I made the decision ot do so, after having been in contact with someone who was named in the poster, who was in favour of my doing so. Secondly, I did so after consulting with a leading scholar on antisemitism. I also did so keeping in mind that I thought it made no sense to have Jewish readers of the Sun seeing the poster, while many Jews in the community who do not get the Sun would not be able to see it.

 
I had a copy of the poster sent to me by a source within the community and they also never suggested that the poster not be shown, and in fact, I have heard back from them complimenting me on the article.
 
I also considered that publication of the poster can possibly benefit the police investigation of the matter. When something such as this shown to readers, it is possible that someone in the community at large on seeing it, will realize that they are aware of somewhere else in the city where the poster is hanging, or where similar posters are hanging, or that they will realize in hindsight that they saw someone hanging posters that looked like this downtown.
 

As for your comments suggesting that I have taken the postiiton that the Winnipeg Free Press shied away form the issue of antisemitism in regards to these posters, I didn’t say that at all. What I was suggesting is that it may be interesting for Bartley Kives , who has written that he has received antisemitic emails , to write a piece about how often in writing pieces where the sbject matters Jewish, results in him receiving antisemitic emails. Has this happened once in his career, 10 times or a hundred times ? How many antisemitic emails has he recently gotten or has he gotten over the span of his career. I have no idea, and it may make for a very interesting article, particularly if he has never reported these incidences to Bnai Brith Canada sucjh that they have not been relected in th e audits of antisemitism Bnai Brith puts out yearly.[ Clearly to the extent that people in the Jewish community do not reporting these incidences to Bnai Brith then the reality may well be that there is more antisemitism out there than is captured by the audit.]. Anyone in the Jewish community who is concerned with antisemitism ought to be encouraging victims of antisemitism to report the incidences to Bnai Brith so their audit includes them and is as reliable as possible.

 
As someone who has previously worked as a lawyer in the Department of Justice, when I read Bartley Kives saying that he has recently been receiving antisemitc hate mail , I began thinking whether he would be sharing that hatemail with city police. Is it possible for example that the culprit/s behind the antisemitic poster have read Kives’s articles about the goings on at City Hall recently and have even in fact sent Bartley similarly worded emails ? If this were the case, then viewing Bartley’s emails and the email addresses from where they were sent could conceivably help police in identifying the culprit/s in the investigation of the antisemitic posters. That is why in my view it could be very important that Bartley share his antisemitic emails recently received with the police. Since I have worked in the Crown’s office before in the area of defamatory posters, I know how diffucult it can be to uncover supporting evidence to identify the author/s of such anonymous posters.
 

If Bartley is in possession of recent antismeitic emails he can share with th epolice, then I (and no doubt many others inthe community) encourage him to do so. I asked the question in the article I wrote about whether Bartly is able to share these emails with police, because I know that at times there are issues of "privilege" that can apply to journalists. It is not always the case that journalists are able to share their emails, or their sources. I don’t know what the policy of the Winnipeg Free Press is in regard to any of the antisemitic emails that Bartley has received , and wouldn’t want to criticize Bartley for not having reported about the existence of the antisemitic emails he has received to the Bnai Brith or the police if in fact there was some journalist related reason why he felt he could not share these emails. That is why I asked the question and I think it is a legitimate question.

If Bartley has received antisemitic emails that he simply decided not to report to Bnai Brith or the police , then I hope he will consider changing this and beginning to report them. As a community, I believe we would be well served if he did so.

Finally, there is one point I wish to ad regarding the coverage of the Winnipeg Free Press in regard ot the article written by Bartley Kives entiteld "Katz Bought Sheegl’s Biz. Certainly, any newspaper has the right to offer criticizm of this transaction , but I urge readers to look at the photo the Free Press chose to use of of Katz laughing with Sheegl. Arguably it is an inflammatory photo as it in my view makes it appear as if katz and Sheegl are having a good laugh about the sale of Sheegl’s buisness to him. Unless the photo was taken at the time the transcaction occurred,(and there is no reason to suggest it was that I can see) why would they match this particular photo with the article? http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/local/katz-bought-sheegls-biz-169428336.html