Lashon hara in NJJN
I am dismayed in your reporting of the “situation” taking place at Temple Beth Miriam (“Insurrection at Temple Beth Miriam,” Feb. 14). Looking at the front page of the paper, I noted the initial negativity in NJJN’s reporting by including “insurrection” in the headline, which caused me to accept your desire not to report, but to define.
The article itself reflected bias, painting Temple Beth Miriam as one of the many diminishing congregations in size, as though this contributed to your allegations. NJJN also condemned by association the congregation’s rabbi by associating him with other clergy alleged of sexual harassment. You disappoint me in your so-called reporting. Journalists report. NJJN comments as though reporting. I would have expected more from a tradition that eschews lashon harah.
Rabbi Brooks R. Susman
Freehold
Editor’s note: The rabbi of Temple Beth Miriam was included in the article because he’s among five named defendants in a lawsuit against the temple. NJJN stands by its reporting.
comments