NYT apologizes for offending 'so many' readers after profile of Nazi sympathizer

[DonViejo]

Source: The Hill




BY OLIVIA BEAVERS - 11/26/17 02:33 PM EST

he New York Times on Sunday issued an apology for offending readers by publishing a profile on a Nazi sympathizer, while defending the piece as an important part of the discussion about fringe activists.

"We regret the degree to which the piece offended so many readers," Marc Lacy, the Times' national editor, wrote in response to the backlash about the piece published on Saturday.

"We recognize that people can disagree on how best to tell a disagreeable story. What we think is indisputable, though, is the need to shed more light, not less, on the most extreme corners of American life and the people who inhabit them. That’s what the story, however imperfectly, tried to do," he continued.

The Times profiled Tony Hovater, a white nationalist and Nazi sympathizer in Ohio, who attended the Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, Va., in August. That rally saw white supremacists converge on the college town chanting "Jews will not replace us." It led to violence, and one woman was killed. She was part of the group of counter protesters demonstrating against the hate groups.



Read more: http://thehill.com/homenews/media/361866-nyt-regrets-offending-so-many-readers-after-profile-of-nazi-sympathizer

[LonePirate]

1. This "apology" is more in the vein of the "I'm sorry you were offended" variety.

There is nothing in there that serves as an apology, imo.

[Panho]

7. I tried to find the words "apologize", "apology" and "sorry" in the article, but couldn't find any

The NYT did not apologize.

[ToxMarz]

15. The NYT did not say they apologized, those words came (inaccurately) from other news sources

[no_hypocrisy]

2. Don't confuse humility with disgrace.

There are better days ahead for Al Franken.

[Bleacher Creature]

3. Here's one of the best reactions I've seen.

Link to tweet

[sarge43]

8. "In person, his Midwestern manners would please anyone's mother."

Well, maybe not a mother who lost her father or elder brother in the Holocaust or at Juno Beach.

And Hitler liked his dog; so he couldn't have been all that bad.

"It's about a fucking Nazi."

Sing it Sister.

[christx30]

11. Hitler was also a non-smoker and a vegetarian.

Plus, he was the guy that killed Hitler. Some people would say that he's a hero.

[DonViejo]

43. And excellent sarcasm it is, too.

[rpannier]

49. Actually he wasn't a vegetarian

Hitler suffered from a gastrointestinal disorder which brought on gas. So, he often refrained from eating meat

Robert Payne is widely considered to be Hitler's definitive biographer. In his book, Hitler: The Life and Death of Adolph Hitler, Payne says that Hitler's "vegetarianism" was a "legend" and a "fiction" invented by Joseph Goebbels, the Nazi Minister of Propaganda. According to Payne: He drank beer and diluted wine frequently, had a special fondness for Bavarian sausages and kept a mistress, Eva Braun… His asceticism was fiction invented by Goebbels to emphasize his total dedication, his self-control, the distance that separated him from other men. By this outward show of asceticism, he could claim that he was dedicated to the service of his people. In fact he was remarkably self-indulgent and possessed none of the instincts of the ascetic."

While it is true that Hitler's doctors put him on a vegetarian diet to cure him of flatulence and a chronic stomach disorder, his biographers such as Albert Speer, Robert Payne, John Toland, et al, have attested to his liking for ham sausages and other cured meats. Even Spencer says that Hitler was a vegetarian from only 1931 on: "It would be true to say that up to 1931, he preferred a vegetarian diet, but on some occasions would deviate from it." He committed suicide in the bunker when he was 56 in 1945; that would have given him 14 years as a vegetarian, but we have the testimony to the contrary of the woman chef who was his personal cook in Hamburg during the late 1930s - Dione Lucas. In her "Gourmet Cooking School Cookbook," she records that his favorite dish - the one that he customarily requested - was stuffed squab (pigeon). "I do not mean to spoil your appetite for stuffed squab, but you might be interested to know that it was a great favorite with Mr. Hitler, who dined in the hotel often."

[Yonnie3]

32. Not Susan Bro, the mother of Heather Heyer either.

I haven't read the article and I'm not going to.

[sarge43]

36. NYT owes Susan Bro an apology for that line alone and not a "sorry you're upset" bs. n/t

[BumRushDaShow]

4. Their credo: "It's easier to ask forgiveness than permission". nt

[renate]

5. I thought it was interesting

To me it seemed to be about how people like him live and walk among us, and we'd never know what was in their minds because of how normally they behave and how normal they look.

[atreides1]

24. Guess what?

Members of the Gestapo and the German police looked and behaved normally, so did those members of the SS who murdered 12 million people in the camps!

The German Nazis also looked and behaved normally.

What makes them different is how they think and what they think...and I hope from here until the day that piece of scum dies, that he will be hounded by those people who are normal...and refuse to accept the presence of a possible advocate of genocide in their neighborhood!!!

[djg21]

45. I thought it a good article.

It scares me that seemingly reasonable, relatively normal appearing and acting people could hold and espouse such abhorrent beliefs. But it does no one any good to ignore the fact that segments within or society do hold these despicable beliefs. The NY Times has done its job and started a conversation. Sunlight always is the best disinfectant.

[Panho]

6. Can you please point to the part where NYT apologizes?

I didn't find it.

[marble falls]

9. I do agree with the need to understand there are Nazis among us passing themselves off...

as reasonable and normal people.

[Martin Eden]

13. So do I.

We need to know the face of the enemy.

[WhoWoodaKnew]

37. Agreed

[Chemisse]

18. I agree.

I haven't read the article, but as long as it does not glorify him, I am all for illumination. I'm certainly curious how someone can come to have such beliefs. In addition, knowledge is power.

So I am baffled as to why NYT was called upon to apologize.

[marble falls]

23. I read the article and didn't get any sense of sympathy for him or Nazis as 'regular folks' ....

or just one of us. It would be nice if there were a mark on these people but I take the story as a reminder to listen to people and get to know who they are.

[marybourg]

40. Possibly because you

actually read the article.

[marble falls]

44. Might could be, just might could be.

[rpannier]

50. I read the article and my take was not the same as yours

I found the article rather reprehensible as I thought, it did normalize this guy as the wonderful friend next door, the guy your mother would love
But, different people can read the same thing and come away with a different take on what is there

[Maven]

10. They can stuff their non-apology. Dean Baquet needs to be replaced immediately

While the NYT still has some credibility left. The Times under his “leadership” has been a disaster.

[sarge43]

14. The editor who approved that POS needs to leave with his stuff in a cardboard box. n/t

[Honeycombe8]

12. I'd have to read it before giving an opinion. nt

[7962]

16. Seems like you're the ONLY one who has any objectivity.

Imagine; reading a story BEFORE being outraged by it!!
I remember years ago religious people protesting the movie "Life of Brian" from Monty Python. None had ever SEEN it. They thought it was insulting to Jesus. It really wasn't.

[rpannier]

51. So, since I read it and found it normalizing a Nazi

I am free to say the story is garbage then?

[7962]

60. Yep!

[rpannier]

61. Cool

[Gothmog]

17. AM JOY 11,26,17 NYT PUBLISHES PROFILE ON NAZI SYMPATHIZER

[Mc Mike]

19. I saw Ms. Reid's coverage, thought she said there was a parody piece from the Atlantic

about the Times' nazi normalization article.

Haven't been able to locate it, here or elsewhere on-line.

[Mc Mike]

56. Here it is, editor James Hamblin's 'Nazis are just like you and me, except they're nazis.'

https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2017/11/a-nazi-cooks-pasta/546737/

[steve2470]

20. I read the article and it did NOT glorify the guy

Granted, it didn't denounce him either. What the author SHOULD have done, was explicitly lay out what Nazism and white supremacy stand for in its hideousness. What happened during WW2 both to Germany and the rest of the world and to 6 million Jews, Slavs, intellectuals, homosexuals, leftists, Roma, etc. THEN... the readers would REALLY have the guy in context.

A monster in plain garb, that's what he is.

[sweetloukillbot]

26. It was a personality puff piece.

I don't think it needed to lay out the history of Nazism, everyone knows that. But it didn't explore WHY he became a monster, it just showed, "Hey, he's normal! Just like you and me, he likes Seinfeld and NPR."

[steve2470]

27. you're right it was, but I would differ in one respect

You and I and the vast majority of DU knows about Nazism. The average Joe and Jane out there do NOT. Hitler is just some stupid idiot on Youtube videos to many young people. People need to be educated on how horrible it was. You and I need no education, but yes, most do, imho.

[sweetloukillbot]

28. That is so fucking sad.... n/t

[djg21]

46. Those you refer to

Live in Alabama and don’t read the N.Y. Times. The words are too big.

[steve2470]

47. um.....

https://www.democraticunderground.com/10029886387

Laters.

[RhodeIslandOne]

39. It seems to me (I read the article) hes easily led

Was once “left leaning”, became a libertarian, and an anarcho capitalist before going full Nazi.

I don’t think he’s particularly smart and doesn’t realize his sense of entitlement.

[J_William_Ryan]

21. Normalizing a Nazi Sympathizer

‘Whatever our goal, a lot of readers found the story offensive, with many seizing on the idea we were normalizing neo-Nazi views and behavior. “How to normalize Nazis 101!” one reader wrote on Twitter. “I’m both shocked and disgusted by this article,” wrote another. “Attempting to ‘normalize’ white supremacist groups – should Never have been printed!”

Our reporter and his editors agonized over the tone and content of the article. The point of the story was not to normalize anything but to describe the degree to which hate and extremism have become far more normal in American life than many of us want to think.’

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/26/reader-center/readers-accuse-us-of-normalizing-a-nazi-sympathizer-we-respond.html?smprod=nytcore-iphone&smid=nytcore-iphone-share

Hate and extremism facilitated by Trump, where Trump’s own hate and bigotry gives license to bigots and racists.

[muriel_volestrangler]

22. Can someone explain what on earth they're actually trying to say?

"The point of the story was not to normalize anything but to describe the degree to which hate and extremism have become far more normal in American life than many of us want to think"

Aren't they just contradicting themselves?

As an example of normalizing the Nazi:

Before white nationalism, his world was heavy metal. He played drums in two bands, and his embrace of fascism, on the surface, shares some traits with the hipster’s cooler-than-thou quest for the most extreme of musical subgenres

More analysis of it here: https://wonkette.com/626173/new-york-timess-nazi-profile-was-better-in-original-german#AiM9Bm3ydocp03dL.99

[steve2470]

25. That Wonkette article is excellent, thank you!

It really puts the monster in much better context.

[ProfessorGAC]

35. I Concur!

A very good read!

[Ned of New Mexico]

29. "Normalizing a Nazi Sympathizer"?

Already done. By the entire media. Last year. He's now in the White House.

[The Wizard]

30. No need for an apology

The story is a warning as to who could be living next to us. The guy is suffering from cognitive dissonance and his reasoning is disjointed lacking any logic. I imagine he might find it difficult getting a job after this Times story.

[Skittles]

52. that's how I read it too

it is just plain JOURNALISM

[ck4829]

31. I look forward to their profile of a Boko Haram member, that's sure to happen anytime, right?

White privilege is getting together and talking about killing people... and it's called freedom of speech.

[RobinA]

34. Wait, What?

The New York Times is supposed to apologize for printing a profile on a guy who represents a scarifyingly large number of our citizens because his opinions are deplorable? That’s... oh wait, I’m not allowed to disagree with prevailing opinion on DU anymore. I’m almost 60 and I never thought I’d see this country become what it is today.

[dalton99a]

38. Title should have: "A day in the life of one of the very fine people

who killed Heather Heyer

[zentrum]

41. Times doesn't get it. nt

[paleotn]

42. Nope.

[X_Digger]

48. I read the article. It doesn't need an apology.

It's an interesting examination of how someone becomes that hate-filled.

[muriel_volestrangler]

55. OK, how did he become hate-filled?

The author of the piece himself says he didn't find that out - he couldn't find his 'Rosebud'. So if you reckon is shows how he became hate-filled, can you explain it, please?

[RhodeIslandOne]

53. Oh well.....

We'll have to live with it.

[steve2470]

54. a long critique here

Last edited Mon Nov 27, 2017, 08:22 AM - Edit history (27)

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

whew....29 part Tweet dissertation...... I hope this gets read

[Behind the Aegis]

57. That is AWESOME!

I am glad some people are actually understanding how stupid the NYT piece was. Then again, when it comes to Nazis, most think "Jews", and Jews just aren't important enough for people to give two shits about.

[muriel_volestrangler]

58. That's very good - thanks for that (nt)

[steve2470]

59. my pleasure! nt