Was a Double Standard at Play for Helen Thomas?

Veteran White House reporter Helen Thomas retired amidst a storm of controversy yesterday, as Nicole Nuss noted for Care2. Thomas, who has been a staple of the White House Press corps since the Kennedy Administration, came under fire last week for comments made on screen regarding Israel. Video of her statement is available here.

Thomas has since issued an apology, but the damage was done. On Sunday, Nine Speakers dropped Thomas as a client, stating that “Ms. Thomas has had an esteemed career as a journalist, and she has been a trailblazer for women, helping others in her profession, and beyond.

“However, in light of recent events, Nine Speakers is no longer able to represent Ms. Thomas, nor can we condone her comments on the Middle East.” (via Politico)

Thomas submitted her resignation on Monday morning, closing over 50 years of reporting from the White House. Thomas is a trailblazer who held presidential administrations fiercely accountable—during President Barack Obama’s recent press conference on the oil spill in the Gulf, Thomas asked why the U.S. is still in Afghanistan, then said “Don’t give us this Bushism ‘if we don’t go there, they’ll all come here.’”

She was an advocate for the press as a means of informing the public, and it’s frustrating to see such a storied career end so quickly. While few condone her remarks, many have noted a double-standard at play.

As Adam Serwer writes for the American Prospect, “It’s worth noting that in American political discourse, … statements of a similar nature are completely appropriate when made about the Palestinians — it’s not, apparently, that bigotry is unacceptable, just the “wrong kind” of bigotry. This is the sort of incident that exposes the more tribal advocates on either side — you cannot argue that there’s something morally wrong about leaving Palestinians stateless and then argue that Israeli Jews should be left that way, just as you cannot argue that it is morally wrong to suggest Jews should “leave Israel” while asserting that Israel has the right to permanently displace the Palestinians.”

Nisha Chittal writes that “Though Helen Thomas spent decades as a press icon, her reputation seems to have been destroyed overnight. I do not condone her remarks, but I do think we should be defending her right to express her opinion, especially when her job was . . . to express her opinion.”

I’m inclined to agree with these trains of thought. While Thomas’ remarks were incredibly insensitive, many male, conservative pundits have said far worse—and kept their jobs to offend another day. There’s not only a double standard concerning how our media covers the fraught relationship between Israel and Palestine, but with how, in this era of punditocracy, a woman with impressive credentials and a history of speaking her mind can be brought down so quickly.

Steve Weiss thoughtfully responds to these concerns at Mondoweiss: “Now this gutsy, plucky character who for me embodied what the real spirit of US journalism is and should be, far more than stenographers-of-power Press Corps colleagues in their prime, meets an undignified end to her career, with ignoble reactions…To the rest of the world this will just add to the perception of hypocrisy and double standards applied to people who speak up about the Israel government’s reprehensible actions. The shift of focus from the core of the issue of military occupation to an off-the-cuff remark — which I think just reflects her growing anger — will be noted.”

Photo courtesy of Brave New Films, via Creative Commons license.

quick poll

vote now!

Loading poll...

no!
leaning no
leaning yes
yes!

no!
leaning no
leaning yes
yes!

Disclaimer: The views expressed above are solely those of the author and may not reflect those of
Care2, Inc., its employees or advertisers.

Martha E.

3:13PM PDT on Jul 6, 2010

Helen Thomas has my admiration for being the last of the good investigative reporters. Yes, she spoke w/o thinking, probably out of deep-felt anger and despair for what is happening. So, she cares ..... She apologized. Enough. She should not have resigned, nor been pressured to resign. No one else has the guts to ask questions that really dig and matter. She was a gutsy woman reporter when there were no others. She was the last light in the White House press room. I'm so sorry to see her go.

send a green star

Beng Kiat L.

2:11AM PDT on Jul 2, 2010

thanks

Loretta R.

10:36PM PDT on Jun 24, 2010

I don't think she should have resigned; she merely spoke the truth, and it seems that we "can't handle the truth."

Philippa P.

4:06PM PDT on Jun 23, 2010

I think there was a double standard at play.

Andrea M.

10:33PM PDT on Jun 17, 2010

She really should have thought before speaking, but at least she was admirable enough to resign in the midst of controversy.

Janice P.

10:34AM PDT on Jun 15, 2010

Not much "free speech" in her speech, was there? I believe that the discrimination against her rose from several levels: those with a blind spot toward all things Israel, mysogeny; and age discrimination. A woman, who is THAT old; no longer the epitome of female "beauty", AND who disapproves of blind partiality toward Israel ....... . She simply had to go. Shameful.

John C.

8:57PM PDT on Jun 11, 2010

Shameful that our memory of Helen Thomas will now be of a discredited news reporter. This is how people with opposing viewpoints are discredited by our government. Some unpopular attribute is shared in as embarrassing a way as possible. They are then ridiculed and branded undeserving of public respect.

Helen Thomas' unpopular opinion is simply that, an opinion. Somehow, it has been blown up into a "politically incorrect ballyhoo" by opponents of her views. Those opponents set out to make her view unpopular (thought control). They influenced the networks to feature this story, and include pre-drawn conclusions, so the viewers would be clued as to "how they should think about this issue".

She was probably faced with a choice:
Apologize or retire.

Everyone who thinks they have the right to deny her freedom to express her personal opinion step up now and take over for God, judge her. We all have an opinion, and a judge (God).

She is willing to defend herself before the judge and we should let her. Those who would judge her here think themselves God.

What will they say when it is their turn? They don't really even believe in Heaven or Hell, or God for that matter. They are certainly not afraid of God. They just use God as a tool to criticize others and find allies to help in the "stoning" of their victims.

These people are acting in the most Un-American an

8:42PM PDT on Jun 11, 2010

Shameful that our memory of Helen Thomas will now be of a discredited news reporter. This is how people with opposing viewpoints are discredited by our government. Some unpopular attribute is shared in as embarrassing a way as possible. They are then ridiculed and branded undeserving of public respect. Helen Thomas' unpopular opinion is simply that, an opinion. Somehow, it has been blown up into a "politically incorrect ballyhoo" by opponents of her views. Those opponents set out to make her view unpopular (thought control). They influenced the networks to feature this story, and include pre-drawn conclusions, so the viewers would be clued as to "how they should think about this issue".

She was probably faced with a choice:
Apologize or retire.

Everyone who thinks they have the right to deny her freedom to express her personal opinion step up now and take over for God, judge her. We all have an opinion, and a judge (God). She is willing to defend herself before the judge and we should let her. Those who would judge her here see themselves as God (The ultimate authority).

What will they say when it is their turn? They don't really even believe in Heaven or Hell, or God for that matter. They are certainly not afraid of God. They just use God as a tool to criticize others and find allies to help in the "stoning" of their victims.

These people are acting in the most Un-American and Un-Christian manner possible while claiming to represent Freedom AND Christianity.

Lynn C.

6:41PM PDT on Jun 11, 2010

No doubt!

Joanna G.

4:34PM PDT on Jun 11, 2010

I would like to say to all those who think Helen Thomas went too far that I think she showed remarable restraint considering all the phoniness she put up with as the most honest, fair and intelligent White House correspondent intoday's entire sorry bunch. Helen was an original--a person who was unafriad to tweak the mane of the lions in their den. What she said of the arrogant abuse of the Palestinians the transplated Zionists drove from their ancestral homes and the indignities and cruelties they were subjected to at the hands of the Israeli government who warred on them and imprisoned them and half-starved them to death was true and spoken from the heart. She certainly had no need to apologize. Those who disagree with this should read the true history of Israel of the last 60 years and the history of Zionisn for the last 100 years. Do not confuse Zionism with Judaism. They are not the same. I am of Helen's generation and know the whole story. My great-grandfather, by the way, was a German Jew. Did that give him the right to confiscate a Palestinian home for his own use?