Becuase Everything Else Sucks

Action Alert Update: The Los Angeles Times Response

By matt
Published Friday, January 26th, 2007, 3:19 pm
Filed under: Videos: Debate, Videos: Political, Human Rights, Genocide, US Politics

On January 24 the Largest Minority issued an Action Alert to its readers to contact the Los Angeles and express their concern over an Op-Ed they published entitled Armenia Haunts the Turks Again and request an apology. Thanks to your participation the LA Times took notice of our campaign, and yesterday published a response entitled The Armenian Genocide and publishing decisions. Needless to say, their response didn’t quite constitute an apology. We are thankful to the Los Angeles Times for addressing our concerns, particularly via their Opinions LA blog. In doing so they’ve opened up the opportunity for debate as well as contributed to the transparency of their editorial process, for which we are grateful. We encourage our readers to participate in the discussion on Opinion LA. Having said that, we aren’t satisfied by their response. Please read the Largest Minority’s full response below.

If you would still like to send the LA Times a letter, click here for our template.

Our Response

As individuals concerned with journalistic integrity, we were expecting an apology from the LA Times for publishing an irresponsible Op-Ed piece regarding the Armenian Genocide at one of the most sensitive times in recent Armenian and Turkish history. Instead, we received even more denial. In a blog post titled “Armenian genocide and publishing decisions,” the LA Times simply claimed that the piece by Hugh Pope was misread by anyone who took offense to it. As Pope claimed Turkey was also a victim of the Armenian Genocide, the LA Times suggests Pope is the victim of an overzealous Armenian Diaspora.

The editors quote our letter as ending, “With best regards, A Concerned Armenian American.” However, our actual template letter ended, “With best regards, YOUR NAME.” The LA Times’ attempt to make this exclusively an Armenian issue by further implying that only Armenians have sent them the letter is false. Any reference to the homogeneity of the letter’s senders is assumptive at best. I personally know several non-Armenians sent a letter to express their dismay. Frankly, the Times’ attempt to misrepresent the source of the public’s outrage seems to be an effort to marginalize the issue. Genocide and its denial is an issue for all humanity. The ability to recognize cleverly hidden denial and remove it from public discourse is a responsibility that the LA Times Op-Ed editors bare.

Aside from his suggestive title, “Armenia Haunts the Turks Again,” Pope’s Op-Ed is riddled with suggestive commentary regarding the events of 1915-1923. The Times claims Pope did not deny the Armenian Genocide, as he did not explicitly say it didn’t happen. The Times emphasized this point exhaustively but irrelevantly. Ultimately, their inability to grasp this illustrates their unfamiliarity with what constitutes denial.

There are two main reasons this piece follows denialist propaganda. First, Pope states that the Turkish government is the real victim which has been “haunted” by the Armenian Genocide. Pope then says efforts to let historians decide whether the genocide even occurred have been thwarted due to “diasporan Armenians who demand formal acknowledgment of the genocide,” and reject scholarly debate. He further states that “politics often seems to trump history,” implying that the Armenian Genocide is merely a tale concocted by the powerful Armenian lobby. Furthermore, Hugh Pope attributes recognition of the Armenian genocide to Armenian lobbyists, not to the fact that it actually happened. Pope even describes foreign parliaments that recognize the genocide as “ill-informed.” The argument for scholarly debate has long been a cornerstone of Turkish Denial.

Secondly, underlying the ignorance of Pope and the defense of ignorance by the LA Times is the issue of racism. I urge you to read Pope’s column, but to replace the word “Armenian” with “Jewish,” “Rwandan,” or even “Native American.” Can you imagine such an Op-Ed piece being published in the LA Times after the assassination of a prominent Jewish activist? Would the Times so readily publish an article in which a German writer said the Germans “have reasons to feel victimized,” and claim that the Jews sided with Germany’s enemies? Better still is the suggestion that all other countries are “ill-informed,” and “give in” to Armenian lobbyists who demand recognition of the genocide. That sort of blatantly racist accusation has also been cast upon the Jewish community for having lobbyists which push their “Holocaust agenda.”

We reaffirm our request for an official apology from the LA Times. It is incredibly disrespectful that such a divisive column would be published after the assassination of a fellow journalist. It’s time the LA Times take some responsibility and stop giving credibility to further ignorance and denialist propaganda. Adding further insult to injury, genocide and the denial of genocide is not an Armenian-American issue. It is an issue relevant to all humanity.

Related Posts

5 Responses to “Action Alert Update: The Los Angeles Times Response”

  1. You state:

    “The editors quote our letter as ending, “With best regards, A Concerned Armenian American.” However, our actual template letter ended, “With best regards, YOUR NAME.” The LA Times’ attempt to make this exclusively an Armenian issue by further implying that only Armenians have sent them the letter is false. Any reference to the homogeneity of the letter’s senders is assumptive at best. I personally know several non-Armenians sent a letter to express their dismay.”

    Is it inconceivable that many Armenians copied and pasted your letter and inserted the words, “A Concerned Armenian American?” You personally knowing several non-Armenians still wouldn’t explain a possible surge of this letter being signed by Armenians. What if the LA Times did receive countless letters signed as they stated in their response? Does that make the issue you’re trying to raise less or more effective? Are you discrediting the Armenian-American stand as not as valuable as simpy American in a sense?

    metin
    01/26/07 at 9:42 pm

  2. @metin

    “Is it inconceivable that many Armenians copied and pasted your letter and inserted the words, ‘A Concerned Armenian American?’”

    Many Armenians? Perhaps. I can see a few Armenians referring to themselves with that specific title, but unless everyone signed their letter that way (which we know they didn’t), there is a racial assumption by the Times as to the type of people sending the letter. Describing all senders as “concerned Armenians” is simply a false statement.

    “Are you discrediting the Armenian-American stand as not as valuable as simpy American in a sense?”

    No, we mean exactly what we said above - that it seems like an attempt to marginalize the outrage over the article to one specific group. After responding to your red herrings in the other post, I’d suggest you try to fully comprehend the issues before you rise in opposition to them. Thank you.

    Manila Ryce
    01/27/07 at 1:41 am

  3. I never said I opposed the term Genocide or the discussion of issues. But you already have spoken for the Armenians amongst us by saying, “I can see a few Armenians referring to themselves with that specific title . . .” And by mixing facts with opinions is what you seem to be doing in your ‘responsible’ recording of events. Maybe a little more comprehension of the issue of Genocide is necessary from your end before you state such gems a, “no serious historian or educated person in the world denies that the Armenian Genocide did occur.”

    I am merely pointing out a blanket approval of any term without all parties (including the one opposing it) is necessary. And Article 301 and other reforms will lead to that. But simply dismissing the Turkish or Turkey’s stance as absurd or challenging the seriousness of any impartial party is also absurd. You make it seem like Turkey and the Turks are the ONLY ones in the global community who have a problem with the word Armenian Genocide.

    In your comment above: “It seems like an attempt to marginalize the outrage over the article to one specific group,” once again you’ve made your case and stance as an automatic approval by the non-Armenians as well. While that may be true in some or even most cases, you have no right to take credit for the representation of the entire group, Armenian or otherwise. In fact, some Turks who are avid readers of The LA Times may have an issue with your assumption that regardless of the Armenian background or not, everyone will see it our way. We may be quite happy with the way Hugh Pope referred to the term. And I suspect (using the same credible evidence you use in your arguments,) that “it seems like an attempt to marginalize the outrage over the article to one specific group.” Aren’t you then opening up the argument that all Armenians must feel one way whereas all Turks would feel the opposite when it comes to the Genocide term. And therefore, shouldn’t Turks use the same argument and state that The LA Times might marginalize the outrage of one specific group - this time being the Turks.

    metin
    01/27/07 at 8:20 am

  4. @metin
    “But you already have spoken for the Armenians amongst us by saying, ‘I can see a few Armenians referring to themselves with that specific title . . .’ And by mixing facts with opinions is what you seem to be doing in your ‘responsible’ recording of events.”

    Seriously? I have never pretended to speak for anyone other than myself, and I hardly speak for “the Armenians amongst us” as I am not one myself. You posed a hypothetical that some Armenians may have referred to themselves as “A Concerned Armenian American”. I agreed with you, stating that while it may have been possible a few did, it was false that all did. We know for a fact that Armenians and non-Armenians both sent the letter. It’s more a matter of mathematic probability than baseless opinion.

    “You make it seem like Turkey and the Turks are the ONLY ones in the global community who have a problem with the word Armenian Genocide.”

    No, I’ve made it seem like politicians, not historians, are the greatest opposition to acknowledgment of the Armenian Genocide.

    “In your comment above: ‘It seems like an attempt to marginalize the outrage over the article to one specific group,’ once again you’ve made your case and stance as an automatic approval by the non-Armenians as well.”

    Round and round we go. No, my statement suggests that the issue is not exclusively an Armenian issue, but a human issue. I find it hard to believe that you really don’t comprehend my arguments, even when I use simple language. You obviously are finding fault where there is none. A friend once told me not to argue with fools as they inevitably drag you down to their level and beat you with experience. On that note, good night.

    Manila Ryce
    01/28/07 at 12:55 am

  5. “not to argue with fools as they inevitably drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.” Now that you mention it, I agree with you on that ‘argument.’ and cheer up . . . humanity will still survive, even if Beckham is no longer a soccer superstar.

    metin
    01/28/07 at 1:45 am

Leave a Reply

Tired of filing this information out everytime you leave a comment at the Largest Minority? Why not register as a user? You also get full access to our forum!

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>