Already a member?
Sign in
Welcome! Wikis are websites that everyone can build together. It's easy!
The "High-Tech Lynching" of a NYC Arabic School Principal
-- by Nashwa Gewaily, Posted October 31, 2007
Before the Khalil Gibran International Academy was slated to open this year as the latest addition to the 70 dual-language schools currently operating in NYC, it was met with a firestorm of controversy and heated opposition sparked by a frenzied grassroots and media campaign against the Arabic immersion school and its principal. Former Principal Debbie Almontaser’s eventual resignation under pressure was the result of what many have described as a smear campaign, character assassination, or – as a rabbi who worked with Almontaser on interfaith initiatives put it – “a high-tech lynching.”
“Madrassa” in the Making
Among the most common inaccurate portrayals of the school were ones that conflated Islam and Arabic language and culture. While in some cases this may have been the result of mere ignorance or uninformed coverage, its consistent occurrence in right-wing newspapers such as the New York Post and the New York Sun can be read as one of several tactics employed in drumming up both outrage and fear. One NY Post column, titled “School Bad Idea Even Before Hebrew-Ha Ha,” opens with the line: "Did you hear the one about the Muslim school led by a Jew?,” referring to Danielle Salzberg, who was appointed interim acting principal following Almontaser’s resignation. A Hannity & Colmes feature on the school ran under the headline “Madrassa in the Big Apple,” with Hannity asking, “Will this be a breeding ground for radicals?” and a graphic reading “Islam 101?” captioning the teaser to the story. The implications of fostering terrorism went even further when Colmes introduced the story, announcing, “Coming Soon to a classroom near you, Al Qaeda,” before clarifying that this did not reflect his personal view. The smear continued, without much subtlety, as 9/11 footage appeared on the screen during talk of the school.
It is safe to say that one would not know from following this coverage that the academy, named after a renowned Lebanese Christian poet, was founded as an entirely secular initiative devoted to teaching Arabic language and culture with an objective of fostering “intercultural understanding.” Contrary to Sean Hannity’s warnings of the “all Muslim school” funded by tax dollars and “blurring the line between separation of church and state,” repeated statements by Almontaser, Academy board members, Mayor Michael Bloomberg, and Department of Education officials insisted that, as a public school, the academy would adhere to the required state curriculum and would not promote any religion, in accordance with both the vision articulated for the school and federal law.
Asked about exhaustive efforts to clarify the secular nature of the school, KGIA advisory board member Reverend Charles Straut conceded in a telephone interview, “I did my duty and I know these fools aren’t gonna listen anyhow so I wasn’t surprised when they did it,” referring to the continued interchangeable use of “Arab” and “Muslim” in the media, and attempts to slander the school and its principal by associating them with an Islamist agenda and consequently, with ties to terrorism.
By creating a nebulous haze of dubious connections and insidious connotations under the masthead of screaming headlines, conservative news pundits, columnists, editorial staff, and talking heads rallied under the banner of antiterrorism as an extreme, but currently politically and socially acceptable, foil to the “soft on terror” liberal caricature. As media critic Robert McChesney wryly notes, "After all, anytime a journalist pushes the conservative agenda they are justified because they are balancing the 'liberal bias' of the dominant media" (McChesney 109).
The Weight of Words
Along with blaring headlines and propaganda pieces were more underhanded and subtly racist forms of getting the message across. This included an emphasis placed on Almontaser's identity as a Yemeni immigrant and observant Muslim by citing her given Arabic name, one that she does not use professionally. In several articles in both the NY Post and NY Sun, Almontaser is referred to as “Dhabah Almontaser" or “Dhabah Almontaser aka Debbie”, the latter as though to imply a deliberate cover-up of her background.This approach is one that draws recent parallels, comparable to the sensationalist xenophobia evident in some media responses to the Muslim heritage revealed by Sen. Barack Hussein Obama’s middle name.
Reactionary coverage played a crucial role in Almontaser’s ultimate decision to step down under intense pressure, after “her attempt to explain away the term intifada on the shirts began a weeklong onslaught of damaging headlines,” as reported by the New York Times. In contrast to mainstream news simplifications of the actual controversial quote, an incisive column in The Jewish Week offered one detailed account: “At the very end of the interview [with NY Post reporter Chuck Bennett], Almontaser told one of these sources, Bennett, without bringing up the T-shirts, asked her almost incidentally what the word “intifada” meant. She consulted an Arabic dictionary and told him: ‘The word basically means ‘shaking off.’ That is the root word if you look it up in Arabic.’
The context of her answer is one that was absent in most reporting, particularly as it was framed as her reply when asked to comment on a T-shirt that displayed the words “Intifada NYC” produced by Arab Women Active in Arts and Media, an organization with no affiliation to Almontaser. Her comments -- in which she said,“I understand it is developing a negative connotation due to the uprising in the Palestinian-Israeli areas. I don’t believe the intention is to have any of that kind of [violence] in New York City,” suggesting an interpretation of feminists “shaking off” oppression -- triggered an immediate backlash that led to her resignation and earned her the label of "The Intifada Principal."
Asked to provide insight into the controversy by telephone, conservative media analyst Roger Aronoff declined to offer immediate commentary, expressing his ambiguous understanding of the story:" from what I remember -- what was it, jihad or intifada or something on some shirts?" The general failure of the media to produce a measured, nuanced presentation of developments as they occurred fed into such confusion surrounding the school and what Almontaser actually said or stood for.
When it came to news outlets typically considered more mainstream or moderate, such as CNN, Rev. Straut observed, "Generally speaking, what I did see seemed to be much fairer than the slanted yellow journalism of the Post and the Sun." Media Research Center analyst Matt Balan, however, watched hours of CNN coverage and came to very different conclusions. He contended, "CNN cannot genuinely portray itself as an "objective" news source if it continues to push this kind of multiculturalism in their reporting and in their questioning of guests," referring to the approach taken by anchorwoman Kyra Phillips in challenging the assertions of Pamela Hall of the Stop the Madrassa Coalition. Asked to elaborate on his observations in a telephone interview, Balan offered only, "I’d say CNN's coverage, at least on that specific day, was sympathetic to the school.”
Antiterrorism as the "Dominant Religion"
Regardless of the wide spectrum of bias interpretations, however, the fact that a local controversy over a Brooklyn school had been made into an extensively covered national issue is one that warrants important questions of its own. This is especially pertinent when taking into account such notions as "fuzzy concepts", accusations of being "too soft" and "playing into their hands", and an ideology that "helps mobilize the populace against an enemy," as assessed in reference to anticommunism within Chomky's Propaganda Model but applicable to today's prevailing slogan of antiterrorism (Chomsky 29). Replacing "Communist" with "terrorist", Chomsky's contention would read, "Liberals at home, often accused of being pro-terrorist or insufficiently anti-terrorist, are kept continuously on the defensive in a cultural milieu in which antiterrorism is the dominant religion"-- an idea that manifests itself acutely in the case of the media and the Khalil Gibran International Academy, particularly as we witness the role of the NY Sun currently in channeling this vintage hysteria by leading the call to "break out the torches and surround City Hall to stop this monstrosity ."
Sources:
Aronoff, Roger. Telephone Interview. 30 October 2007.
Balan, Matt. Telephone Interview. 30 October 2007.
Chomsky, Noam and Edward S. Herman. Manufacturing Consent. New York: Pantheon Books, 1988.
McChesney, Robert W. The Problem of the Media. New York: Monthly Review Press, 2004.
Straut, Charles. Telephone Interview. 30 October 2007.
Before the Khalil Gibran International Academy was slated to open this year as the latest addition to the 70 dual-language schools currently operating in NYC, it was met with a firestorm of controversy and heated opposition sparked by a frenzied grassroots and media campaign against the Arabic immersion school and its principal. Former Principal Debbie Almontaser’s eventual resignation under pressure was the result of what many have described as a smear campaign, character assassination, or – as a rabbi who worked with Almontaser on interfaith initiatives put it – “a high-tech lynching.”
“Madrassa” in the Making
Among the most common inaccurate portrayals of the school were ones that conflated Islam and Arabic language and culture. While in some cases this may have been the result of mere ignorance or uninformed coverage, its consistent occurrence in right-wing newspapers such as the New York Post and the New York Sun can be read as one of several tactics employed in drumming up both outrage and fear. One NY Post column, titled “School Bad Idea Even Before Hebrew-Ha Ha,” opens with the line: "Did you hear the one about the Muslim school led by a Jew?,” referring to Danielle Salzberg, who was appointed interim acting principal following Almontaser’s resignation. A Hannity & Colmes feature on the school ran under the headline “Madrassa in the Big Apple,” with Hannity asking, “Will this be a breeding ground for radicals?” and a graphic reading “Islam 101?” captioning the teaser to the story. The implications of fostering terrorism went even further when Colmes introduced the story, announcing, “Coming Soon to a classroom near you, Al Qaeda,” before clarifying that this did not reflect his personal view. The smear continued, without much subtlety, as 9/11 footage appeared on the screen during talk of the school.
It is safe to say that one would not know from following this coverage that the academy, named after a renowned Lebanese Christian poet, was founded as an entirely secular initiative devoted to teaching Arabic language and culture with an objective of fostering “intercultural understanding.” Contrary to Sean Hannity’s warnings of the “all Muslim school” funded by tax dollars and “blurring the line between separation of church and state,” repeated statements by Almontaser, Academy board members, Mayor Michael Bloomberg, and Department of Education officials insisted that, as a public school, the academy would adhere to the required state curriculum and would not promote any religion, in accordance with both the vision articulated for the school and federal law.
Asked about exhaustive efforts to clarify the secular nature of the school, KGIA advisory board member Reverend Charles Straut conceded in a telephone interview, “I did my duty and I know these fools aren’t gonna listen anyhow so I wasn’t surprised when they did it,” referring to the continued interchangeable use of “Arab” and “Muslim” in the media, and attempts to slander the school and its principal by associating them with an Islamist agenda and consequently, with ties to terrorism.
By creating a nebulous haze of dubious connections and insidious connotations under the masthead of screaming headlines, conservative news pundits, columnists, editorial staff, and talking heads rallied under the banner of antiterrorism as an extreme, but currently politically and socially acceptable, foil to the “soft on terror” liberal caricature. As media critic Robert McChesney wryly notes, "After all, anytime a journalist pushes the conservative agenda they are justified because they are balancing the 'liberal bias' of the dominant media" (McChesney 109).
The Weight of Words
Along with blaring headlines and propaganda pieces were more underhanded and subtly racist forms of getting the message across. This included an emphasis placed on Almontaser's identity as a Yemeni immigrant and observant Muslim by citing her given Arabic name, one that she does not use professionally. In several articles in both the NY Post and NY Sun, Almontaser is referred to as “Dhabah Almontaser" or “Dhabah Almontaser aka Debbie”, the latter as though to imply a deliberate cover-up of her background.This approach is one that draws recent parallels, comparable to the sensationalist xenophobia evident in some media responses to the Muslim heritage revealed by Sen. Barack Hussein Obama’s middle name.
Reactionary coverage played a crucial role in Almontaser’s ultimate decision to step down under intense pressure, after “her attempt to explain away the term intifada on the shirts began a weeklong onslaught of damaging headlines,” as reported by the New York Times. In contrast to mainstream news simplifications of the actual controversial quote, an incisive column in The Jewish Week offered one detailed account: “At the very end of the interview [with NY Post reporter Chuck Bennett], Almontaser told one of these sources, Bennett, without bringing up the T-shirts, asked her almost incidentally what the word “intifada” meant. She consulted an Arabic dictionary and told him: ‘The word basically means ‘shaking off.’ That is the root word if you look it up in Arabic.’
The context of her answer is one that was absent in most reporting, particularly as it was framed as her reply when asked to comment on a T-shirt that displayed the words “Intifada NYC” produced by Arab Women Active in Arts and Media, an organization with no affiliation to Almontaser. Her comments -- in which she said,“I understand it is developing a negative connotation due to the uprising in the Palestinian-Israeli areas. I don’t believe the intention is to have any of that kind of [violence] in New York City,” suggesting an interpretation of feminists “shaking off” oppression -- triggered an immediate backlash that led to her resignation and earned her the label of "The Intifada Principal."
Asked to provide insight into the controversy by telephone, conservative media analyst Roger Aronoff declined to offer immediate commentary, expressing his ambiguous understanding of the story:" from what I remember -- what was it, jihad or intifada or something on some shirts?" The general failure of the media to produce a measured, nuanced presentation of developments as they occurred fed into such confusion surrounding the school and what Almontaser actually said or stood for.
When it came to news outlets typically considered more mainstream or moderate, such as CNN, Rev. Straut observed, "Generally speaking, what I did see seemed to be much fairer than the slanted yellow journalism of the Post and the Sun." Media Research Center analyst Matt Balan, however, watched hours of CNN coverage and came to very different conclusions. He contended, "CNN cannot genuinely portray itself as an "objective" news source if it continues to push this kind of multiculturalism in their reporting and in their questioning of guests," referring to the approach taken by anchorwoman Kyra Phillips in challenging the assertions of Pamela Hall of the Stop the Madrassa Coalition. Asked to elaborate on his observations in a telephone interview, Balan offered only, "I’d say CNN's coverage, at least on that specific day, was sympathetic to the school.”
Antiterrorism as the "Dominant Religion"
Regardless of the wide spectrum of bias interpretations, however, the fact that a local controversy over a Brooklyn school had been made into an extensively covered national issue is one that warrants important questions of its own. This is especially pertinent when taking into account such notions as "fuzzy concepts", accusations of being "too soft" and "playing into their hands", and an ideology that "helps mobilize the populace against an enemy," as assessed in reference to anticommunism within Chomky's Propaganda Model but applicable to today's prevailing slogan of antiterrorism (Chomsky 29). Replacing "Communist" with "terrorist", Chomsky's contention would read, "Liberals at home, often accused of being pro-terrorist or insufficiently anti-terrorist, are kept continuously on the defensive in a cultural milieu in which antiterrorism is the dominant religion"-- an idea that manifests itself acutely in the case of the media and the Khalil Gibran International Academy, particularly as we witness the role of the NY Sun currently in channeling this vintage hysteria by leading the call to "break out the torches and surround City Hall to stop this monstrosity ."
Sources:
Aronoff, Roger. Telephone Interview. 30 October 2007.
Balan, Matt. Telephone Interview. 30 October 2007.
Chomsky, Noam and Edward S. Herman. Manufacturing Consent. New York: Pantheon Books, 1988.
McChesney, Robert W. The Problem of the Media. New York: Monthly Review Press, 2004.
Straut, Charles. Telephone Interview. 30 October 2007.
Latest page update: made by NashwaG
, Nov 8 2007, 2:30 PM EST
(about this update
About This Update
Moved from: Further Resources
- NashwaG
No content added or deleted.
- complete history)
Moved from: Further Resources
- NashwaG
No content added or deleted.
- complete history)
Keyword tags:
Arabic
Debbie Almontaser
Khalil Gibran
NY Post
NY Sun
More Info: links to this page