We have had a significant response to an editorial cartoon that we ran in April called “Street Justice.”  This cartoon was provided to us by Steve Greenberg, a longstanding editorial cartoonist who syndicates to a number of Jewish publications. Additionally, two weeks ago, based on initial response, we wrote a commentary explaining our thought process when we decided to run the cartoon. Now, with the benefit of time and consideration of some of the opinions and perspectives expressed, we want to take this opportunity to share our conclusions since we ran the cartoon.

Here is the bottom line: We at the Jewish Light regret publishing the cartoon.

Although the reaction to our decision to publish was quick, we felt it was very important that our further consideration of that decision be reasoned and thorough. That process takes time, and is very different from how we consider matters on deadline each Tuesday. We unfortunately do not always have the luxury of countless hours of deliberation when on deadline.

The previous commentary we wrote about our reasons for publishing the cartoon was our way of explaining what we were thinking as we approached deadline on the Tuesday the cartoon ran. It was not intended to describe what we were thinking during our continuing deliberations after the cartoon was published, and we should have made that more clear.

We also want to reiterate that the Light endeavors to provide a wide range of other people’s opinions and perspectives on matters. The cartoons are not provided to express the Light’s editorial position, but rather the views of the artist, whether we agree or not. In this way, the cartoons are like the various independent opinions we publish, via commentary, letters and analysis, and therefore unlike the “Jewish Light Editorial” that is so labeled and provided on the left-hand side of the first Opinion page. 

So with that in mind, here’s what we’ve been thinking about since the cartoon was published. 

In a nutshell, we don’t think the comparison made in the cartoon was a good or fair one, for a couple of reasons.

First, the Vietnam War photograph, at the time it was taken and ran in numerous publications, was itself interpreted in many different ways, and was therefore ambiguous as to its meaning.  In fact, the Pulitzer-Prize winning photographer, Eddie Adams, felt terrible afterward for the photo: “People believe them; but photographs do lie, even without manipulation. They are only half-truths. …”  So to offer a cartoon depiction of that photo as a comparison to another very different, complex situation in Israel is confusing and unhelpful. 

In addition, the cartoon cel with the IDF soldier also is ambiguous. It obviously has been taken by many as referring to the conduct of the IDF as a whole, while others took it as a commentary on the individual soldier’s conduct. For what it’s worth, and given our understanding of Greenberg’s body of work through the years, we did not feel the cartoon was meant to refer to the IDF as a whole.

But we at the Light need to remember that readers don’t have the opportunity to, and should not have to, think about the history of a cartoonist’s work when reading a single cartoon, and that background is largely irrelevant to them. We clearly should have considered the cartoon and its lack of context from the reader’s perspective. For not doing so, we sincerely apologize.

While we think the cartoon didn’t handle the issue well, we think it’s critical to provide space for opinions on this very significant topic of “street justice” in Israel. It’s a heated issue and there are a number of opinions on the subject. 

As a JTA article we ran last week illustrates, there are many in Israel who believe that any charge leveled against the soldier, including the current manslaughter charge, is wrong, and a number of those Israelis have expressed this view in writing, at protests and beyond. 

 Others have claimed that position undermines the Rule of Law of the Israeli government and the IDF, and that no one, not even a soldier facing terrorists on the street, is above the law.

The views in both of the two above paragraphs are fair to state, and we feel it’s our job to provide different voices on important Jewish and Israeli issues like this one. The issue in question is one of many for which we strive to offer a variety of perspectives to our readers.

However, in this case, this cartoon did not provide a respectful and accurate view on the underlying issues, and in reflection, we shouldn’t have published it. We’re sorry for that decision, and as with all issues that a journalistic outlet faces, this one will add to our knowledge base and hopefully serve us well in the future.