Publisher Judith Regan fired for anti-semitic remarks

26 posts / 0 new
Last post
Maysie Maysie's picture
Publisher Judith Regan fired for anti-semitic remarks

 

Maysie Maysie's picture

Publisher Judith Regan, recently in the news for the book "If I Did It" which was cancelled by Rupuert Murdoch, has been fired. Her alleged comments include saying that a "Jewish cabal" within Harper Collins was not supporting her in her bid to plan a March 2007 release for a book about Mickey Mantle.

She's always seemed a bit out there, so perhaps this is poetic justice?

quote:

[Andrew] Butcher [HarperCollins spokesperson] said that Regan and [Mark] Jackson [lawyer for HarperCollins] were discussing an upcoming Regan book, Peter Golenbock's "7: The Mickey Mantle Novel," in which the author, imagining he is Mantle, details a life of sexual exploits, including a tryst with Marilyn Monroe.

With Mantle's family and fans of the late Yankee enraged, Regan and Jackson of HarperCollins were discussing the timing and content of the planned March release, according to Butcher. Regan got frustrated by what she believed was HarperCollins' lack of support, and lashed out.

She complained that Jackson, Friedman, HarperCollins Executive Editor David Hirshey and longtime literary agent Esther Newberg were a "Jewish cabal," Butcher said.

Butcher said she pleaded with Jackson: "Of all people, Jews should know about ganging up, finding common enemies and telling the big lie."


[url=http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/O/OJ_SIMPSON_PUBLISHER?SITE=MTBIL&S... story here[/url]

[ 31 December 2006: Message edited by: bigcitygal ]

Unionist

quote:


Originally posted by bigcitygal:
[b]She's always seemed a bit out there, so perhaps this is poetic justice?[/b]

Sounds like just plain justice to me.

Legless-Marine

quote:


Originally posted by unionist:
[b]

Sounds like just plain justice to me.[/b]


If that's what you call a rush to judge and condemn with insufficient information.

I don't see justice here, but I do smell a witch hunt.

[ 31 December 2006: Message edited by: Legless-Marine ]

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

Yes, Judith, the Jews are well-known for conspiring to keep really lame book ideas from being published...

...of course, the Masons are probably in on it too. Well, Jackie Mason anyway.

[img]rolleyes.gif" border="0[/img]

[ 31 December 2006: Message edited by: Ken Burch ]

Maysie Maysie's picture

I never trusted Mason jars either.

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

And do we really know what Perry Mason gets up to when he's not in court?

Maysie Maysie's picture

quote:


The Stonecutters Song
Who controls the British crown?
Who keeps the metric system down?
We do! We do.
Who leaves Atlantis off the maps?
Who keeps the Martians under wraps?
We do! We do.
Who holds back the electric car?
Who makes Steve Guttenberg a star?
We do! We do.
Who robs cave fish of their sight?
Who rigs every Oscar night?
We do! We do.

[url=http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread10380/pg]From abovetopsecret.com[/url]

[ 31 December 2006: Message edited by: bigcitygal ]

Unionist

quote:


Originally posted by Legless-Marine:
[b]

If that's what you call a rush to judge and condemn with insufficient information.

I don't see justice here, but I do smell a witch hunt.
[/b]


Look, I don't care for Rupert Murdoch. But when a highly placed publisher gets her ass fired for making off-colour remarks about Jewish conspiracies and Jews sticking together, etc., I lift a glass of wine and say, "Tough shit - go find an honest job!"

I'm not vindictive, of course. I think Canada should grant her political asylum if she choose to make her home here. She'll have to clean up her language, of course.

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

And then in five or ten years she'll be a Tory cabinet minister making speeches about how passionately "pro-Israel" she is.

Unionist

quote:


Originally posted by Ken Burch:
[b]And then in five or ten years she'll be a Tory cabinet minister making speeches about how passionately "pro-Israel" she is.[/b]

[img]biggrin.gif" border="0[/img] [img]biggrin.gif" border="0[/img] [img]biggrin.gif" border="0[/img]

All right, Ken, you get a Happy New Year from me for that line!

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

Back at ya, unionist.

Here's to 2007. It can't get worse than 2006...
...uh, can it?...nah, couldn't be... [img]confused.gif" border="0[/img]

Legless-Marine

quote:


Originally posted by bigcitygal:
[b]Publisher Judith Regan, recently in the news for the book "If I Did It" which was cancelled by Rupuert Murdoch, has been fired. Her alleged comments include saying that a "Jewish cabal" within Harper Collins was not supporting her in her bid to plan a March 2007 release for a book about Mickey Mantle.
[/b]

It appears that there is more to this than meets the eye:

[b]Eyewitness backs ousted O.J. publisher -
Ex-Regan aide says publisher didn’t make anti-Semitic remark[/b]
[url=http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16333372]http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/1633337...

"On Friday, he issued a statement saying del Toro had come forward and “confirmed that Judith never used the phrase ’Jewish cabal,’ nor made any other anti-Semitic statement during that phone conversation.”

This article was published a week before your posting. I'm surprised it wasn't considered relevant enough to mention.

[ 02 January 2007: Message edited by: Legless-Marine ]

Maysie Maysie's picture

quote:


This article was published a week before your posting. I'm surprised it wasn't considered relevant enough to mention

Excuse me?

I didn't leave anything out. I didn't know about this. Thanks for bringing this to our attention.

And btw, the use of the term "witch hunt" is problematic.

So there! [img]tongue.gif" border="0[/img]

Michelle

If Legless-Marine's most recent article is true, I hope Regan sues their asses off for defamation. I sure wouldn't want to be looking for work in any industry with something like that hanging over my head, and if it's a lie, then that's pretty awful.

That said, I think those two book proposals are clear enough reasons to fire someone for incompetence. [img]biggrin.gif" border="0[/img]

Maysie Maysie's picture

Are you kidding, Michelle? I think she's signing her own book deal on the emotional strain of this incident as we speak! Coming soon, in hardcover in Fall 2007, 10-city tour. [img]tongue.gif" border="0[/img]

Unionist

Well, if the accusation against Regan was a complete concoction, then of course she is innocent of that particular charge.

Although I note the witness, who says Regan used the term "cabal" rather than "Jewish cabal", does not seem to deny the allegation that Regan said, "Of all people, Jews should know about ganging up, finding common enemies and telling the big lie." Nor have I seen Regan deny that. All I read is that the witness said Regan made no anti-Semitic remarks, which of course is a judgment call.

One still wonders, then, why Regan would think the religion of her adversaries was a suitable topic to raise in this context.

Legless-Marine

quote:


Originally posted by bigcitygal:
[b]

And btw, the use of the term "witch hunt" is problematic.

[/b]


How so?

johnpauljones

quote:


Originally posted by Legless-Marine:
[b]

How so?[/b]


It is offensive to those who abide by the customs of rules of the religion of Wicca

Unionist

quote:


Originally posted by bigcitygal:
[b]

And btw, the use of the term "witch hunt" is problematic.
[/b]


Actually, I don't really see that. I see "witch hunt" as being a synonym for "lynching" or "pogrom". All of these were (and are) horrendous historical realities, but when used to describe a campaign or action of which one violently disapproves, isn't that actually a proper use of the term?

It's not like using the term "witch" as a term of abuse, which is quite the opposite phenomenon.

jeff house

quote:


I see "witch hunt" as being a synonym for "lynching" or "pogrom".

Witch hunt refers to a specific series of events in Europe, primarily.

In later years, it was used to refer to persecution of Communist Party members and sympathizers (and even non-sympathizers!) by officialdom.

During the McCarthy years in the USA, Congressional Committees would extort names of members of the Communist Party. Those who refused to answer were committed to jail, and usually lost their jobs.

Some people extend it to mean that no one may be described as being a member of the Communist Party, by anyone else, even when they are a member, and when nothing is at stake other than full disclosure of political commitments. Since I do not believe that the exercise of freedom of speech should be described as a witch hunt, I think this latter use is problematic.

Unionist

quote:


Originally posted by jeff house:
[b]
Some people extend it to mean that no one may be described as being a member of the Communist Party, by anyone else, even when they are a member, and when nothing is at stake other than full disclosure of political commitments. Since I do not believe that the exercise of freedom of speech should be described as a witch hunt, I think this latter use is problematic.[/b]

Jeff, what you describe is more often termed [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red-baiting]red-baiting[/url], I think:

quote:

Red-baiting is the act of accusing someone, or some group, of being communist, socialist or, in a broader sense, of being significantly more leftist at their core than they may appear at the outset. The term is used mainly with the intention of discrediting the individual's or organization's political views as dishonest and/or haphazard. The implication in red-baiting is usually that the target represents an ill-intentioned external force which has no proper place in a given political party, coalition, or union.

Maysie Maysie's picture

Currently, some people use terms such as "witch hunt", "lynching" and "pogroms" to refer not only to the specific historic events where those terms arose, but to refer to times when the mechanisms of the State make concerted and systemic efforts to name, find, jail, physically abuse and (often) kill certain groups of people (see jeff's example above). While I myself don't use those terms in those contexts, I can see the parallels.

For LM to use such a term, in this particular context, is problematic in a couple of ways. First of all, it's a red herring. If Regan didn't say the specifics of the anti-semitic part of her alleged remarks, then the firing becomes a set up for her, and a public excuse for HarperCollins to say as the reason she was fired. That or the O.J. book. My guess is they were looking for a way to get rid of her (perhaps she's become more trouble than they wanted to deal with anymore), even though they have benefitted from her "out there" ways, through her imprint.

Second of all, Regan is not part of a group of "out there" publishers, being persecuted by HarperCollins. HarperCollins is one of the more mainstream publishers under their own name and [b]have[/b] published some tripe, let me tell you. [i]Men are From Mars, Women are From Venus[/i], anyone? But I digress.

It's disingenuous to describe her recent experience as a "witch hunt" and in fact degrades the experience of those whose experiences more closely align with the origins of that term.

She doesn't deserve a pity party, and if her firing holds she will be scooped up by some other publisher soon enough.

I checked out the Reganbooks part of the HarperCollins website. Ralph Nader has a book with them coming out this month! [url=http://www.harpercollins.com/search/index.aspx?kw=reganbooks]Reganbooks link here[/url]

Unionist

Ok, BCG, I just understood your "problematic" statement better!

Maysie Maysie's picture

Kewl, unionist. Only 13703 more to go. [img]biggrin.gif" border="0[/img]

Legless-Marine

quote:


Originally posted by bigcitygal:
[b]
It's disingenuous to describe her recent experience as a "witch hunt" and in fact degrades the experience of those whose experiences more closely align with the origins of that term.
[/b]

I did not imply that Judith's experiences are a witch hunt. Her's is a classic case of a railroading.

The witch hunting has been done by those who have allowed their eagerness to condemn and vilify take precedence over the need to verify information or properly establish guilt.

Stop me if this sounds familiar.

[ 24 January 2007: Message edited by: Legless-Marine ]