The NY Post's Apology Was as Tasteless as Their Cartoon
Date: Monday, February 23, 2009, 6:42 am
By: Deborah Mathis, BlackAmericaWeb.com
Brooklyn city council member Letitia James speaks out as New York State Sen. Eric Adams holds the cartoon in the New York Post.
It was more than 20 years ago. I had just begun writing a regular opinion column, and I had unnecessarily offended a public official. An apology was in order, and I didn’t hesitate to offer it.
After admitting my mistake in the opening lines, I proceeded to explain how I had come to make it.
“Next time, don’t do it that way,” counseled Bob McCord, my editor and a veteran newsman with decades of editorial writing under his belt. “People don’t want to hear your excuses. Just say, ‘I’m sorry; I was wrong,” and let it go at that.”
The editors of
The New York Post could have used McCord’s good counsel last week, when they penned what began as an apology but ended as a scolding about its preposterous cartoon in which two police officers gun down a chimpanzee and one says, “They’ll have to find someone else to write the next stimulus bill.”
“It was meant to mock an ineptly written federal stimulus bill. Period,” read
The Post editors’ post-mortem. “(T)o those who were offended by the image, we apologize.”
Part of an editor’s job is to protect his or her newspaper’s integrity and credibility while, at the same time, honoring and upholding age-old tenets of free expression. It can be a tricky walk – and headachy – but that’s why they get paid the big bucks.
Any editor so socially lacking that it would not occur to him how the chimpanzee cartoon might be read is either too unfamiliar with the national story to be editor of a major newspaper - or he knew how it might be taken and liked it that way.
The Post’s editorial response to the outcry over the cartoon read like it was written by someone who had been forced to apologize against his will. After that tepid beginning – “to those who were offended by the image” – the thing went stone cold.
“There are some in the media and in public life who have had differences with
The Post in the past,” the editorial noted, “and they see the incident as an opportunity for payback. To them, no apology is due.”
Resentment and hubris, short-temperedness and sucker punches are not appropriate undertones for apology, which is supposed to come from humility. The truly apologetic don’t have to be coerced and do not litter the process with excuses or blame-finding.
What that reeking piece of editorial malpractice did was not unlike someone stepping on several folks’ feet; saying he’s sorry to those who found it painful and excoriating those who he thinks always have their feet in the way.
The offender fails to recognize the real possibility of being both injured and having your feet in the way too.
But this is not complicated. The conventional wisdom is that the paper’s owner, the irascible Rupert Murdoch – said to be something of an Obama fan – demanded that his hirelings make some sort of atonement for a cartoon that, in many views, was a sneak and racist attack on the country’s first black president.
It was, therefore, an empty gesture that suggests that certain people don’t mean a hoot to the editors.
Otherwise, the piece would have been short and sweet: “We’re sorry; we were wrong.” That might have bought a little good faith. Instead,
The New York Post becomes the big city tabloid with not only a racist streak, but a racist streak it is determined to defend.
Please Login or Register to Rate this article
Here we go again--another White structure attempt at subtle racism. White people give it a rest--we are on to you! Just because it's not blatent--does not mean we don't see it! Peace!
by
Carole9
March 12, 2009, 11:07 am
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WHEN ONE MAKES - SILLY, STUPID, IGNORANT, UNINTELLIGENT REMARKS, THE APOLOGY IS NOT SINCERE. THEY KNEW EXACTLY WHAT THEY WERE DOING - OR - SAYING. APOLOGY IS NOT SINCERE.
by
Misspat15
February 27, 2009, 9:30 pm
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Frankly, their apology means nothing to me. The post did what they did and knew exactly what the so-called cartoon portrayed. There are many interpretations; none of which are positive. They could care less about repercussions. What repercussions? Even people appalled by this as well as all the other insulting portrayals they have done will continue to patronize them. As they say, they are exercising their freedoms. Haha!
by
Wang
February 26, 2009, 12:58 pm
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Doc, I'll state again...minorities don't have enough readership to effect the NY Post in the least. Ebony and Jett, now that's another story.
by
Jiggy5
February 26, 2009, 7:52 am
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
why not just boycott , and hurt them where it hurts most -the pocket of corp bamerica
by
Doc3474741
February 25, 2009, 6:40 pm
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------