At The Atlantic, Andrew Sullivan's heavy-handed criticisms of Israel have pushed colleague Jeffrey Goldberg over the edge. An exasperated Goldberg writes:
Yes, it's upsetting that Andrew Sullivan, a man of obvious intellectual gifts (and someone for whom I retain great personal fondness), has become an anti-Israel propagandist. But it's not my job to counter everything he says. He's not particularly interested in hearing fact-based arguments that undermine whatever argument he happens to be making, in any case. And even if he did care, it's not in the best interests of The Atlantic, or of my journalism, or my sanity, to spend my time worrying about Andrew's ever-shifting views on the Middle East.
So I'm unilaterally disengaging from this struggle. I pray, of course, that Andrew comes to see that his oversimplification of Middle East history and politics has caused real damage to real people, but it's time for someone else to argue with him.
There is another benefit to disengagement. As Goldblog readers know, I'm deeply distressed by many currents in Israeli society and politics, the continuing, disproportionate power of the settlement movement being chief among my concerns. But I find myself hesitant to criticize Israel these days because my words are inevitably used by people who don't have Israel's best interests, or the best interests of American Jews, at heart. So I want to find a new way to write about these issues.
Sullivan's take on the Ramat Shlomo controversy prompted Goldberg's last fisking.
As a media watchdog, Goldberg's frustration strikes a chord with me.
There's a small, small handful of journalists – Robert Fisk and John Pilger come to mind — who have a talent for cranking out content throroughly slanted against Israel. Are they worth a point-by-point response? Not really, because "fisking Fisk" is time consuming, and results in an excessive word count. (Yes, the term "fisking" really is named after Robert Fisk)
Isolating certain points may be more practical, but I worry that it doesn't do justice to other issues raised.
In the end, I don't see the Fisks and the Pilgers being open to what Israel's supporters have to say. No matter what I write, it's only a matter of time till their next screed.
I'm not ready to add Sullivan to that that class. But it's significant that Goldberg's the one saying — in essence — "Andrew's being Andrew again."
