After the Post: Stark Truth

Shiva has just ended for the Stark family and the media frenzy has moved on to new targets. We have not. The horrific abduction and murder of Menachem Stark continues to shock our entire community to its core, and rightfully so.

As most know by now, the New York Post, headline and subsequent articles created uproar the likes of which we haven’t seen in a very long time. What is still most troubling to me is the defamation of an entire community. When the Post references an entire group “Hassidic,” while reporting about an individual, that is sensationalist journalism at its worst.

Aside from its despicable headline, “Who didn’t want him dead?,” the Post article was filled with stereotypes and inflammatory innuendo about the Chassidic community. As examples, “the millionaire Hassidic slumlord” “he is a Hassidic Jew from Williamsburg and we think he is a scammer” etc.

The use of the term “Hassidic Slumlord” is clearly inappropriate and intentionally provocative. Fair-minded observers recognize the ramifications of negatively stereotyping individuals and communities. The Post, to no ones surprise, shrugged its shoulder and moved on to its next meal.

Let’s be honest. There is no justification for identifying the alleged misdeeds of one individual with an entire ethnic or social group. Portraying a landlord of Chasidic lifestyle as a “hasidic slumlord” is insensitive at best and disgusting at worst. In the aftermath of such a terrible tragedy I believe it was unconscionable. Lost in the blaring headline was an innocent family and close-knit community reeling from the shock of Mr. Stark’s untimely demise.

The coverage also symbolized the negative perception of Chasidic Jews in the secular media.

As someone who is engaged in the profession of representing clients in the public relations arena, I am fully cognizant of the fact that perception is the first step towards reality. I’ve been trying to understand why it is that the Chasidic community seems to be held to a different standard.