Disney's CEO, Michael Eisner, is Jewish; the chief of Miramax, Harvey Weinstein, is Jewish. Yes, there are plenty of Christian and other Hollywood executives who worship money above all else, promoting for profit the adulation of violence. Does that make it right for Jewish executives to worship money above all else by promoting for profit the adulation of violence? Recent European history alone ought to cause Jewish executives to experience second thoughts about glorifying the killing of the helpless as a fun lifestyle choice.
Now, according to Roger Simon's blog (and implicitly confirmed by the fact that, Soviet-style, Page 2 has silently deleted all references to Easterbrook on its columnist index and has deleted all of his stories from its archives), ESPN.com has fired Easterbrook. Obviously, there's a lot to say here, but here are just four thoughts:
1. Simon is disappointed that ESPN.com fired Easterbrook, but for heaven's sake, let's get serious here. Disney owns ESPN.com. Eisner runs Disney. Easterbrook accused him of being a money-worshipping Jewish executive -- emphasis on the Jewish. However you feel about whether members of the press generally should be immune from the consequences of irresponsible things they say, publicly slurring your boss is going to take the shine off your halo.
2. Easterbrook's apology is just plain bizarre. Easterbrook said that his heart was in the right place, but the devil was in the details: his mistake was "not realizing that words having to do with Jewish identity have a triggering effect based on thousands of years of history." First, huh? Never heard the one about Jews and money? Second, if, as he says, Easterbrook didn't mean to associate the "worship [of] money above all else" to the Jewishness of the executives, then what did he mean? The passage literally reads as if he is expecting Harvey Weinstein to say "but you can't criticize me for worshipping money above all else! I'm Jewish! Don't I get a pass here?"
3. As Adam (himself a Jewish professional, though I hazard to say that his worship of TV surpasses his worship of money) has pointed out, Easterbrook's column is tired anyway. In his NFL column, Easterbrook was positively evangelical about a lot of things (blitzing, play-action on second down, rushing late in games, NFL Sunday Ticket, "thong-based" pictures) but had a zealot's inability to see that there are valid, or sometimes irrefutable, counterarguments (e.g. that there is no antitrust violation in the NFL's decision to let DirecTV be the exclusive provider of Sunday Ticket -- a topic about which Easterbrook's brother Frank should know a thing or two). And ESPN.com already seemed to be trying to rein Easterbrook in -- for example, Easterbrook in the last few weeks stopped including links to cheerleaders' calendar pictures.
4. Which brings up another point: Easterbrook's column had a proudly lecherous streak (he had a particular, um, soft spot? for the Eagles' cheerleaders' lingerie calendar). what kind of a religious conservative is Easterbrook if he is opposed to violence but is a vocal proponent of T&A? The moral of this parable? Presbyterianism must be fun.
That's all for me, but I'm sure that's not all from you.
No comments:
Post a Comment