An in-depth look at how The New York Times failed in its coverage of the fate of European Jews from 1939-45. It examines how the decisions that were made at The Times ultimately resulted in the minimizing and misunderstanding of modern history's worst genocide. Laurel Leff; a veteran journalist and professor of journalism; recounts how personal relationships at the newspaper; the assimilationist tendencies of The Times' Jewish owner; and the ethos of mid-century America; all led The Times to consistently downplay news of the Holocaust. It recalls how news of Hitler's 'final solution' was hidden from readers and - because of the newspaper's influence on other media - from America at large. Buried by The Times is required reading for anyone interested in America's response to the Holocaust and for anyone curious about how journalists determine what is newsworthy.
#1321983 in Books Cambridge University Press 2010-04-19 2010-06-10Original language:EnglishPDF # 1 8.98 x .71 x 5.98l; 1.00 #File Name: 0521713722346 pages
Review
9 of 15 people found the following review helpful. Notes on the Cambridge Companion to MuhammadBy Darrell SuttonAs stated: "The Cambridge Companion to Muhammad is designed to represent current trends in the scholarly study of Muhammad's life and legacy" (p.14). This is an adequate description; no embellishment of this statement is found within these pages. The authors are astute. This is a well-written book of 325 pages and contains 14 chapters spread over three sections: (I) Muhammad in his world; (II) Muhammad in History; (III) Muhammad in memory. The eminent writers "all hold academic appointments" (again p.14) and the reader is informed that they "write with intellectual rigor and uncommon clarity of thought." However; there are a few problems. Muhammad's character and career is positively described in ways that are reminiscent of Jesus or Buddha; in this narrative the Founder of Islam has a sword; but it is properly sheathed. Unlike scholars who work on the texts of the Bible these writers are hesitant to note any place where the Quran is in `error;' even when they discuss problematic historical issues. There is an amazingly uncritical view of Muhammad put forward; a volume on Jesus Christ written up like this would encounter one difficulty after another as it made its way through the editing stages of the average university academic press. Shia and Sufi page citations are noted explicitly in the index (p.324); Sunni citations are absent. But they need not be mentioned in any case; for in this volume of essays the main Sunni themes are pervasive and conspicuous. As for the reception theories of section III; there was not even a segment on the radical influences of so-called Jihadi ideas on persons from medieval times unto modernity; i.e. the 11th and 12th century Ismaili sect of assassins; who used murder as a political weapon: they are also absent in the index (p.318).The content is not unusual. For example: J.E. Brockopp; the editor; and W.A. Saleh present competing views about when Muhammad began to preach his message of submission and how long he preached it in Mecca. This contradiction; though; was not intentional. The former believes the sources say he waited 3 years after the vision from Gabriel (p.6); the latter seems to be unfamiliar with these sources or does not agree; for he says Muhammad "preached almost a decade" (p.34). Then Uri Rubin's article alleges that post-Quranic literature created a 'New Muhammad' of miracles signs and wonders; something the Quran does not support; so he thinks. Incidentally there are Imams by the thousands who could refute that thesis simply by iterating features of the Arabic text Q 54:1;2 of which he seems unaware. Michael Lecker downplays the conflict between Muhammad and the Jews in Medina by assuming there is a corruption in the text: that the word "yahud" (Arabic word for 'Jews') was later inserted and was not in the original text. And so dismissing a particular historical bias previously attributed to Muhammad (p.66); how convenient for the ancient MS!The rest of the essays bear more of the same fruit that is sown in the early papers. Most of them are artfully written and constantly beg the reader to believe that ancient interpretations of Islam; Muhammad and the Quran led many people astray from perceivable explanations that are currently academic dogma. Hence one should believe that the light finally has come in this new Cambridge Companion. This is a useful book but useful for the wrong reasons. Each paper is enlightening; but more so for the reader with little Arabic. The Quranic texts cited tend to be re-imagined in a-typical ways; the footnotes are filled with titles of Arabic volumes whose texts are often mistranslated or misunderstood; much better it is when they cite one another in English journals; but even then one feels as if an author is attempting to demonstrate his familiarity with a colleague's work rather than with historical facts.If only I had not had studied the Hijazi and Levantine dialects; and the Quran; in Saudi Arabia and Jordan the authors' conclusions would have been more believable. It seems that the long hours spent studying and discoursing in the King Abdul Aziz University library in Jeddah has inoculated me against many assertions in this book: serving in the US Marine Corps and serving in US consulates in the Middle East also immunized me from some misleading caricatures of Muhammad which plague this volume. As a result I can state firmly: if you are looking to understand the Muslim who walks the streets of Turkey; Indonesia; Syria; Yemen; Oman or Tunisia; Palestine etc.; or if you desire to learn more about the 7th century Muhammad who is adored and revered by various Islamic sects throughout the world; this volume may be a bit of a disappointment. On the other hand; if you are interested in the type of critical Islamic scholarship that (I believe) must be done in order to obtain academic standing and/or tenure; this is the ideal volume. Notwithstanding; one should remember that this; too; is a `post-Quranic' piece of scholarship; and in not so subtle ways it does offer to readers some variegated accounts of a "New Muhammad."
