Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
The New York Times' 'Nazi Correspondent'
This is from this past June. It seems that the NY Times has a long history of being bad at reporting and kowtowing to fascists, racists and anti-semites...
At the outbreak of the Second World War, The New York Times bureau chief in Berlin, Guido Enderis, was known to sit in the bar of the citys famous Adlon Hotel spouting a loudmouthed defense of Nazism, eventually provoking another reporter to complain to the Times publisher: Isnt it about time that The New York Times did something about its Nazi correspondent?
But the Times had no intention of doing anything about Enderis. In fact, it valued his close connections to the Nazi government, as it had throughout the 1930s. All American newspapers found reporting in Nazi Germany difficult. The government tightly controlled information and harangued and threatened reporters who managed to publish what it didnt like. The Nazi regime also didnt hesitate to use its strongest weaponsbanning a newspaper from distribution in Germany, kicking a reporter out of the country, or denying a reporters reentry. As a putatively Jewish-owned newspaper, The New York Times considered itself a special target. Bureau chief Enderis job therefore was administering reasonably soothing syrup to Nazi officials, as another Times reporter put it.
Yet, Enderis actions werent purely strategic and their consequences were grave. Throughout the 1930s, Enderis helped steer Times coverage to play down Jewish persecution and play up Germanys peaceful intentions. He kowtowed to Nazi officials, wrote stories presenting solely the Nazi point of view, and reined in Times reporters whose criticism he thought went too far, shaping the news in favor of a genocidal regime bent on establishing a Thousand Year Reich.
Other New York Times reporters, most conspicuously Walter Durantywho deliberately minimized the Soviet famine that took millions of Ukrainian lives in the 1920shave become notorious for misreporting the news, once time had passed and archives had opened. Enderis, however, has remained largely under the radar. I wrote about him in my 2005 book, Buried by The Times: The Holocaust and Americas Most Important Newspaper, but Enderis personal perfidy likely got lost in the transgressions of his employer.
To be clear, the Times had no agenda to bolster Nazism. In fact, Arthur Hays Sulzberger, the Times publisher during most of the Nazi era, detested Hitler and advocated U.S. intervention to stop German aggression. Nor was Enderis a Nazi collaboratora charge that should be leveled carefully, given that Nazi propaganda services actually enlisted American correspondents.
Instead, what crippled the Times coverage of Hitler and the Nazis was a timidity and deference to authority born of being an institution controlled by Jews who desperately wanted to fit into WASP society. Rather than run the slightest risk of being tossed out of Nazi Germany and causing a ruckus over its Jewish ownership, the Times let a figure like Enderisa pitiful ally of some of historys greatest villainslead its Berlin bureau during its most consequential decade.
https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/history/articles/new-york-times-nazi-correspondent
But the Times had no intention of doing anything about Enderis. In fact, it valued his close connections to the Nazi government, as it had throughout the 1930s. All American newspapers found reporting in Nazi Germany difficult. The government tightly controlled information and harangued and threatened reporters who managed to publish what it didnt like. The Nazi regime also didnt hesitate to use its strongest weaponsbanning a newspaper from distribution in Germany, kicking a reporter out of the country, or denying a reporters reentry. As a putatively Jewish-owned newspaper, The New York Times considered itself a special target. Bureau chief Enderis job therefore was administering reasonably soothing syrup to Nazi officials, as another Times reporter put it.
Yet, Enderis actions werent purely strategic and their consequences were grave. Throughout the 1930s, Enderis helped steer Times coverage to play down Jewish persecution and play up Germanys peaceful intentions. He kowtowed to Nazi officials, wrote stories presenting solely the Nazi point of view, and reined in Times reporters whose criticism he thought went too far, shaping the news in favor of a genocidal regime bent on establishing a Thousand Year Reich.
Other New York Times reporters, most conspicuously Walter Durantywho deliberately minimized the Soviet famine that took millions of Ukrainian lives in the 1920shave become notorious for misreporting the news, once time had passed and archives had opened. Enderis, however, has remained largely under the radar. I wrote about him in my 2005 book, Buried by The Times: The Holocaust and Americas Most Important Newspaper, but Enderis personal perfidy likely got lost in the transgressions of his employer.
To be clear, the Times had no agenda to bolster Nazism. In fact, Arthur Hays Sulzberger, the Times publisher during most of the Nazi era, detested Hitler and advocated U.S. intervention to stop German aggression. Nor was Enderis a Nazi collaboratora charge that should be leveled carefully, given that Nazi propaganda services actually enlisted American correspondents.
Instead, what crippled the Times coverage of Hitler and the Nazis was a timidity and deference to authority born of being an institution controlled by Jews who desperately wanted to fit into WASP society. Rather than run the slightest risk of being tossed out of Nazi Germany and causing a ruckus over its Jewish ownership, the Times let a figure like Enderisa pitiful ally of some of historys greatest villainslead its Berlin bureau during its most consequential decade.
https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/history/articles/new-york-times-nazi-correspondent
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
5 replies, 2878 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (12)
ReplyReply to this post
5 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
The New York Times' 'Nazi Correspondent' (Original Post)
tenderfoot
Oct 2021
OP
Response to tenderfoot (Original post)
jfz9580m This message was self-deleted by its author.
dalton99a
(81,488 posts)2. Sulzberger didn't give a shit about the Holocaust
For the better part of a decade, Enderis appeasement of the Nazi government had been the subject of grumbling within the Times and among the Berlin press corps. In September 1940, it threatened to blow up into a full-scale scandal. While monitoring Nazi radio reports for the BBC, Warren Irvin, a former New York Times city desk reporter and part-time Geneva correspondent, noticed something unsettlingNazi radio quoted The New York Times a lot. When Irvin checked, he discovered Guido Enderis byline on many of those stories. Irvin wrote Times publisher Sulzberger, imploring the newspaper to do something about its Nazi correspondent. If Sulzberger didnt, Irvin warned, he would. I dont want to do anything to hurt my own paper, but I feel that loyalty to my country comes first, and if some action is not taken I shall feel compelled to publish these facts. ...
Sulzberger took the advice, warning Irvin that if he published what you call `facts Sulzberger would sue for defamation and give the reasons why Enderis is a useful and valued member of the Times staff. Irvin wrote back: what I call facts are facts. Enderis has made no secret of his pro-Nazi sympathies. Irvin added: I dont question the usefulness and value of Mr. Enderis to The New York Times. I DO question the right of the greatest American newspaper to maintain a pro-Nazi as its Chief Correspondent in Berlin in times like these.
The absence of two experienced reporters and the silence of one hurt the Berlin bureau. The Times resorted to relying heavily upon the wire services. Of the 38 Times stories about the Jews that originated in Berlin in 1940 and 1941, 25 were from the Associated Press and United Press. This occasionally bothered James. In mid-November 1941, Propaganda Minister Goebbels laid out a 10-point charter for the Nazi campaign against the Jews, which the Times reported on page 11 from a UP account. James chided Enderis in a cable: Upee twentyfour hours ahead you on Jewish story.
The story reported Goebbels terrifying prediction. In this historical showdown every Jew is our enemy, regardless of whether he is vegetating in a Polish ghetto or delays his parasitic existence in Berlin or Hamburg, or blows the war trumpets in New York and Washington, the story quoted Goebbels. The current developments are fulfilling Adolf Hitlers prophecy on Jan. 30, 1939, that the Jews in Europe would be exterminated if international finance succeeds in hurling the nations into a world war.
Sulzberger took the advice, warning Irvin that if he published what you call `facts Sulzberger would sue for defamation and give the reasons why Enderis is a useful and valued member of the Times staff. Irvin wrote back: what I call facts are facts. Enderis has made no secret of his pro-Nazi sympathies. Irvin added: I dont question the usefulness and value of Mr. Enderis to The New York Times. I DO question the right of the greatest American newspaper to maintain a pro-Nazi as its Chief Correspondent in Berlin in times like these.
The absence of two experienced reporters and the silence of one hurt the Berlin bureau. The Times resorted to relying heavily upon the wire services. Of the 38 Times stories about the Jews that originated in Berlin in 1940 and 1941, 25 were from the Associated Press and United Press. This occasionally bothered James. In mid-November 1941, Propaganda Minister Goebbels laid out a 10-point charter for the Nazi campaign against the Jews, which the Times reported on page 11 from a UP account. James chided Enderis in a cable: Upee twentyfour hours ahead you on Jewish story.
The story reported Goebbels terrifying prediction. In this historical showdown every Jew is our enemy, regardless of whether he is vegetating in a Polish ghetto or delays his parasitic existence in Berlin or Hamburg, or blows the war trumpets in New York and Washington, the story quoted Goebbels. The current developments are fulfilling Adolf Hitlers prophecy on Jan. 30, 1939, that the Jews in Europe would be exterminated if international finance succeeds in hurling the nations into a world war.
Midnight Writer
(21,765 posts)3. This comes up on Hate Radio now and then.
They think it makes the point that the "liberal" news organizations support fascism, and use this as an example.
Similar to how they cite Democratic Party's support of Jim Crow laws back in the day as evidence Democrats are a racist party.
tenderfoot
(8,433 posts)4. Conservatives at the time were pro-Hitler/anti-intervention - why they're not constantly reminded of
that, I'll never know.
czarjak
(11,277 posts)5. The Civil Rights Act in 1964 flipped all that.