Yossi Ginzberg responds to Rabbi Avi Shafran’s blast against blogs:
Yes, all true, but…
“If not for the fear (of government sanction) men would eat each other alive” (Avos).By censoring scandals out of the “frum” media, by forcing “Panim Chadashos” and the like out of business, by eliminating any social shunning for malfeasance, we have created a situation where sadly many if not most shuls have ex-cons on the mizrach wall, we have scandals not once in a decade as it once was, but every few weeks.
In the name of lessening chilul Hashem, it has been instead multiplied, as there are no longer any consequences in the frum community to illegal actions. Let’s not kid ourselves- people who wouldn’t dream of non-glatt meat too often won’t hesitate to lie, cheat and steal.
The frum world has brought this plague on themselves, by being too defensive. Using clout to force papers not to print articles about Jewish crimes actually abets future criminals by effectively decriminalizing the actions, and if the shul/ yeshiva/ community still honors the individual, why should he hesitate to do it again?
Attacking bloggers and websites is more of the same. Name names, actually DO something about crooks, abusers, frauds, mesarvim ledin, and these acts will stop happening as much.
Rabbi Gil Student of Hirhurim posts: "I recently asked a she’eilah of whether I am allowed to give out the URL for my blog on Shabbos, because I frequently get requests for it. I was told that since I have divrei Torah and divrei hashkafah on my blog, it is a devar mitzvah and mutar. I think that is a profoundly different perspective than that given by R. Shafran in this article."
Translation: Rabbi Student asked a rav whether he could give out his blog address on Shabbos and was told he could because it contained Torah.
Rabbi Natan Slifkin comments:
“The writer of a recent article in the Agudath Israel monthly The Jewish Observer expressed chagrin at discovering the nature of many Jewish blogs… some of those personal opinion-diaries, he found, display utter disregard for essential Jewish ideals… I would have added basic fairness to the list. And truth.”
This is quite ironic. The Jewish Observer printed some serious attacks on one of my books, which I believe reflected a lack of knowledge of the relevant sources in the Rishonim and Acharonim, as well as misunderstandings of the issues and distortions of my writings. I wrote several letters to The Jewish Observer in response, which were, of course, not printed. (One of Rav Hirsch’s descendants likewise wrote a letter protesting the JO’s take on Rav Hirsch’s position, which he felt was terribly inaccurate).
Now, obviously I don’t hold Rabbi Shafran responsible for everything that the Jewish Observer does; I would imagine that sometimes their policies upset him as much as they upset others. However, I don’t believe that it is possible to speak about the importance of fairness and truth without recognizing the problem posed by a magazine which never gives voice to dispute and different opinions (even from within the Torah world), and which attacks people without giving them a chance to present their side of the story.
And this is where Rabbi Shafran’s point about the evils of blogs becomes somewhat undermined. To be sure, there is much hate and mockery on the Internet (aside from the treif material which is a very serious problem). But it also presents a way in which the other side of the story can be heard, which is vital when official publications refuse to acknowledge that any such other viewpoint exists. Furthermore, with regard to the unfortunate tone of much of what is out there, I think that official establishment voices such as the JO should likewise be shouldering some of the blame. As long as the Orthodox world suppresses and silences Torah views that are not “party line,” it is only to be expected that people will use the internet to express their frustration and resentment. Eizehu chacham, ha’ro’eh es ha-nolad.
(The letters to the JO from myself and others are posted on my website at http://www.zootorah.com/controversy/jo.html )
Menachem Lipkin writes:
I’m not sure that the JO (or any established publication)and Rabbi Shafran (or any conventional columnist) can be the most objective observers when it comes to assessing blogs. They represent both the soap box and the man on the soap box, who until the advent of blogs, had relatively tight control over what gets expressed to the masses; certainly in the orthodox Jewish world. Blogs have greatly undermined this control as the threshold for establishing a blog is far lower than what was necessary to start a conventional publication.
I imagine that there was also an outcry from the “establishment” when, with the advent of the printing press, a similar proliferation of information and ideas ensued. Just as Dr. Gewirtz indicated, time will allow us to integrate this new medium and put it in its proper place.
This is not to totally discount some of the issues that Rabbi Shafran raised. But what Rabbi Shafran sees problems and dangers are possibly an opportunity. Maybe the loshon hora, meanness, deceit, disrespect, etc. are just symptoms of a larger problem and our focus should be on understanding what is causing these people, young and old, to lash out so ferociously at our religion and its leadership?
Batya Medad posts: "You get foul, anti-halachik utterings in all sorts of publications, radio, TV etc, but we can also learn good things from them. We have to use today’s technology for good and not ignore or condemn it, or it will become much worse."
