Can someone parse this for me? On the one hand "I should have... I could also have... voices... ought to have been considered..." and yet "an apology would be the wrong response". Is the claim "I made bad mistakes, but I am proud that I made them, and anyone who wants me to try to fix things should get stuffed?" Isn't that what "I refuse to apologize"! means?: Ian Buruma: An Apology Would Be the Wrong Response: "I should have insisted that the accusations against him were spelt out in more detail. He omitted the fact that he had caused injury, with reports of one woman suffering a cracked rib, and he didn’t mention the large number of women who had accused him. I could also have made it clear that our intention had not been to exonerate him, let alone to excuse violence against women.... The voices of his accusers ought to have been considered, as a response to his evasions...
So Ian Burumu's NYRB did not spell out the accusations against Ghomeshi, did not mention that more than 20 women accused him, did not "ma[k]e it clear that our intention had not been to exonerate him, let alone to excuse violence against women", did not consider the voices of his accusers. And Buruma knew that the piece would be "provocative" and "expected to be criticised".
And yet for Buruma:
Ian Buruma: An Apology Would Be the Wrong Response: "The ferocity of the reaction surprised me... accused of promoting a rapist. My own journalistic writings... scrutinised for proof that I was a misogynist. Online petitions... to get me fired.... University presses threatened to pull their ads.... Interview... in which I said of Ghomeshi: 'The exact nature of his behaviour—how much consent was involved—I have no idea, nor is it really my concern'. By this, I meant that I was mainly concerned with what happened later, but it was read as though I had no concern for what had happened to the women.... The magazine’s owner decided I had to go...
...In my view, an editor should not be afraid of publishing contentious subject-matter; the job is to make people think. There is much talk on American campuses of the need to avoid opinions, or even literary works that might make students feel uncomfortable. But a certain degree of discomfort can help people consider unfamiliar or unorthodox points of view, which is usually salutary.... The NYRB... had published writers who behaved violently before.... I would not claim that Ghomeshi is a master stylist. But the quality of a person’s prose should not determine how we judge the writer’s moral character. And moral character, in turn, shouldn’t be the sole determinant in whether the person should or should not be published.... I decided that an apology would be the wrong response.... The intensity of the reaction has been alarming and is detrimental to the freedom of expression. Editors should be able to take risks. Denunciation, instead of debate, will result in a kind of fearful conformity. Too much anxiety about defying the zeitgeist will have a stultifying effect on public discourse...
It was not "read as though I had no concern for what had happened to the women..." He literally said "how much consent... is... [not] really my concern..."
#noted #journamalism
