Supremely Pathetic NY Times Reporting on the Siyum HaShas

by rabbifink on August 3, 2012 · 40 comments

I like the NY Times. The quality of content and the breadth of its coverage is outstanding. I am a subscriber and I enjoy reading as much as I can read of the Times in print and online. I feel comfortable with the Times in my home because they avoid the salacious tabloid stories you find in the other papers and report the important and interesting stories. (We get the Wall Street Journal as well for many of the same reasons.)

It is rare to see them blow the coverage as badly as they have done with their story on the Siyum HaShas.

A story in the Metro Section spend approximately 10 words talking about the Siyum and about 1000 words talking about women in orthodox Judaism. Don’t get me wrong, women in orthodox Judaism is an important story. We talk it about it all the time around here. But it was not the story of the Siyum.

This is the kind of thing one would expect from a tabloid. Talk about the small detail that gets people riled up to sell papers. But the NY Times is better than that.

The Siyum was the biggest event in recent memory in New York. Almost 100,000 people in one place at one time. It’s not as if the Siyum could be written off as a blip on the radar. It was a major event. Traffic was the worst it has been in 25 years according to some traffic experts due in part to the Siyum. The traffic reports on the radio were talking about the event in greater detail and with greater reverence than the NY Times article. During traffic reports the story is the traffic, yet they still managed to slip in some information about the event. The NY Times story was about the Siyum and they nearly forgot to talk about the Siyum. There was plenty to report. The Times could have talked about the rabbis at the Siyum who came from Israel. They could have talked about the concept behind Daf Yomi. They could have talked about the actual event. But they did not.

I don’t attribute this faux pas to anti-Semitism or disdain for traditional orthodox Judaism. I chalk it up to dismal reporting. That is what it was and for the NY Times to miss the point on such a huge event is rare and also disappointing.

As for the mechitza and the implications thereof. First of all, the mechitza was up for about 35 minutes of a 6 hour program. It was so insignificant in the grand scheme of things that to be talking about the mechitza is to completely miss the point. The women were not being “hidden”. Frum Jews simply pray with a mechitza at almost all times. That’s what they did here. The organizers of the event wanted people not to have to think about compromising in their standards of separated prayer. Still, people want to talk about it. So here you go.

I don’t think anyone really thinks the mechitza was absolutely necessary. It was impossible for one to see across the stadium. The women were so far away from the men that I can’t imagine anyone would have a halachic problem davening without the mechitza. In the small area where men and women sat near one another I think a mechitza between the men and women would have been appropriate. The all encompassing mechitza was a bit more than necessary. But Frum Jews don’t like to pray without a mechitza and it is understandable that they would plan to use a mechitza during davening times. This is all normal behavior.

It did look a bit strange to the insider and to the outsider. But again, this is what most orthodox Jews expect at an event that has two minyanim. The fact that there was no mechitza for 5 and a half hours simply outweighs the fact that there was a mechitza for 35 minutes. I am not saying that this was “progress”. I am saying that this is normal in orthodox Judaism so you can’t make a big deal about something that is normal in orthodox Judaism simply because it took place in MetLife stadium.

Personally, I found the constant reminders at the Siyum about “kavod HaToyrah” and the extend they separated men and women a bit over the top. Nothing is going to happen if men and women walk into the stadium together. To prove my point, there were no separate exits and men and women left the Siyum together, were walking together in the parking lot, and as far as I know, there were no incidents of offensive immoral behavior due to the commingling of men and women. Would the kedusha of the event have been compromised if we all used one entrance? Probably not. So I don’t love the idea of over-separated men and women. But I expect it, and it is not the story of the Siyum. Not one bit.

And for next time, if you want to sit with your wife, your daughter, your sister, or the other women in your life, pony up for a suite. Those are unregulated seating sections. Start saving your pennies now.

Link: NY Times

  • azigrae

    So you want to them to instead of reporting on women in orthodox Judaism, report on how 100,000 Jewish men got together to celebrate the completion of a book about how to deal with impure women. Seems legit.

    • http://hatthief.blogspot.in/ Meir

      Touche

  • tesyaa

    Until the last decade or two it was normal in Orthodox Judaism that when women are in a balcony, there is no additional mechitza. What you say is “normal” for Orthodox Judaism is what has become “normal” in the last 20 years. Fine and understandable for someone of your generation. But people my age and older may have a different perception of what is “normal” and what isn’t.

    We’ve been fed a bunch of stories about the immutability and timelessness of Orthodox Jewish practices… yet I’ve seen so much change in the short 30+ years that I’ve been Orthodox that those stories are clearly bogus.

    • http://finkorswim.com E. Fink

      That’s all true but it’s not the story here. And please don’t try to tell me that the NYT was reporting on the tend to the right in orthodox Judaism.

      • tesyaa

        I wasn’t commenting at all on the NYT coverage. I was taking exception to your use of the word “normal”.

        • http://finkorswim.com E. Fink

          The “new normal”. Which I too protest.

    • Lisa Neuman

      Rav Moishe paskened that a mechitza is only required for davening WITHIN a shul, and is NOT required for impromptu (and by that I mean outside of a bais keneses) minyanim, i.e. the minyanim that pop up in wedding halls (even within the heyligeh BP) etc.

      • hot kugel

        You may be right but you don’t want to botch up the largest minyan in 2000 years. Another thing is that the ladies were really supposed to get a whole chunk of the stadium so they made the mechitzas but plans were changed the last minute and the mechitzas were already made, and they were stuck with it. Maybe. Another thing is that they had to cater to everybody in order to make sure the stadium gets full.

  • http://twitter.com/daniopp Daniopp

    wait, the NYT botched reporting?! STOP THE PRESSES!

  • tesyaa

    Clearly the siyum was an emotionally uplifting event for a huge number of Orthodox Jews. I think that’s awesome. I think the behavior of participants as reported in the media and from participants was beyond reproach. That makes frum Jews look good. But I don’t think you can translate the legitimate emotional high you and others got from the event to the outside world. The Times likes to pick an angle that it thinks will pique the interest of its readers. Rightly or wrongly, it felt that anecdotes about the rabbis from Israel and background about Talmud study were not as interesting as “gender” issues.

    In an era when egalitarianism and social justice are taking center stage after centuries of women, people of color and homosexuals being marginalized, I don’t find that surprising. Whether or not you agree that Judaism marginalizes women, you can certainly see how the Times could make that assumption.

    • http://finkorswim.com E. Fink

      …and that editorial decision was a mistake in my opinion.

      • tesyaa

        You are, understandably, too close to the event emotionally. Despite the large attendance and legitimate significance to the participants, the siyum was a human interest story rather than a major mainstream news event. Given that, the choice of a human interest angle (albeit not the one you would have chosen) is inevitable.

      • MarkSoFla

        Do they still have editors or did they fire all of them yet?

  • MarkSoFla

    My gut feeling is that they focused on the male-female separation and the mechitza for two primary reasons:
    1. They were playing off the brouhaha a few months ago when we all (including the NY-area papers IIRC) discussed the high cost of the mechitza that would only be used for 6 hours (and really only got used for 35 minutes). So basically, they just took our lead and used that as the basis for their article.
    2. The fact that it was so obvious and noticeable. Tall and wide curtains, etc. A more demure mechitza, much shorter, and in colors that matched the seating area, would have been much less noticeable.

    And, of course, the human interest “hook”.

  • http://twitter.com/daniopp Daniopp
  • Avi-Gil Chaitovsky

    I had the same thought yesterday – http://on.fb.me/OwQfo3

  • S.

    You’re missing the real story about the mechitza (just as they are). Seven and a half years ago there was a siyum in MSG and there were also women. There was also davening, and no mechitzah. I was there 15 years ago too, and I cannot remember if there were women (although there probably were) so I can’t say anything about that.

    So what changed in 8 years? Are we frummer, more scrupulous? No, we’re crazier, more fundamentalist and going off the rails. Yes, I said and still say that the Siyum was wonderful and “for one night all was well in Orthodoxy.” But of course the mechitza was purchased with 250,000 wasted dollars many months ago, a planned further foray off the rails into nutiness.

    I had the same thought when I visited the Rambam’s grave in 2004. I had previously been there in 1996. In 1996 there was no mechitza bissecting the grave, making it look ridiculous as it does now. And he lay there for 800 years before it, with no mechitza. What changed between 1996 and 2004? Did people start davening there? No, of course not.

    So even though this was for 35 minutes, even though it was a very positive, pleasant event – the mechitza does signify something.

    • http://finkorswim.com E. Fink

      Indeed, that is a real story. It’s not the story in the NYT. But I think it is an important story.

    • Joe

      MSG did have a Mechitza 7 1/2 years ago.

      • S.

        He said/ she said. I sure didn’t see one.

  • Joe

    Entering the stadium is a longer, slower, process with people waiting in line for security and shmoozing. Exiting was 1-2-3. You’re out. Hence, no need for separate exits.

    • http://finkorswim.com E. Fink

      Took me 40 minutes to get from my seat to my car. It was long enough for plenty of illicit schmoozing. And it that really the concern? Shmoozing?

  • Holy Hyrax

    >I chalk it up to dismal reporting.

    The NYT is a left-of-center paper. When something in the Siyum sort of goes counter to “progressive” and Liberals values, especially when it deals with female equality, they will home in on that. They reported based on their values. So yes, dismal reporting.

    • http://twitter.com/kishmirintukis martin garfield

      They were reporting on a human interest story. believe it or not, the whole event was of limited interest to the general public and to non-orthodox Jews. It probably was given more reportage than it warranted.

      • Anonymous

        They regularly report on events the entire world see as insignificant. many non-orthodox Jews found the Siyum to be an incredible event. They missed the boat for one main reason, they are looking to promote sales. However you want to rationalize their misreporting it boils down to sales. Taking a contrary view, and finding the controversy and inhumane point, however minuscule it may be, riles people up and sells papers. It doesn’t matter that of all the thousands of women who attended none of them had ill feelings about it. They were certainly mistreated much the way Judaism always mistreats women.

  • ahg

    Anyone else think it’s ironic that this is being discussed on the day that the Talmud (the very book being celebrated) teaches us was a joyous day where the single women would dress in white, dance in the vineyards, and the single men would go to *see* them to find a spouse. ( Presumably they talked to them too. )

    Oy vavoy… men intermingling with women… seeing them dance… it must have led to who knows what… a shiduch? what a klipah it must have been. Rachmana Litzlan.

    • http://finkorswim.com E. Fink

      Yes. Very ironic.

    • http://finkorswim.com E. Fink

      And we have a shidduch crisis!

  • MarkSoFla

    Here’s coverage from a different newspaper, The Salt Lake City Tribune. that is a little better.

    http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/world/54617979-68/celebration-stadium-thousands-jewish.html.csp

    Also, you can tell that this was no asifa because in some of the photos, people are holding tumahdik devices that can access the Internet.

    • http://hatthief.blogspot.in/ Meir

      I saw several asifa live-tweets

      • http://finkorswim.com E. Fink

        There were rabbonim on the dais on their iPhones at the Asifa.

      • MarkSoFla

        Several??? There were hundreds if not thousands of them!

  • http://twitter.com/SchreiberTweets Michael Schreiber

    The NYT is a newspaper devoted to New York, the US and the World, not to Jewish people. 100,00 Jews getting together is newsworthy even to non Jews, hence they report on it. But they do it through the lens of a secularist sensibility. The way Orthodox women are treated is clearly in conflict with modern, advanced, societies

    It’s not a misstep by The Times. It’s appropriate reporting. That it offends Orthodox Jews points to the fact that this Orthodox practice has no place in an intellectual world.

    • azigrae

      Well said.

    • http://finkorswim.com E. Fink

      I disagree. 35 minutes of mechitza time was mothe story here.

  • kweansmom
    • http://finkorswim.com E. Fink

      Good thing or bad thing? :)

  • http://twitter.com/alexphilo7 Philo
  • kman

    Seems like they were following your opinion which you once stated (Dear Chaya) that Torah considers women to be second class citizens

    • http://finkorswim.com E. Fink

      I never said that.

Previous post:

Next post: