JewishWorldReview.com must be enjoying its moment in the sun but whether or not the website runs Ann’s column has no significance. It won’t decrease Ann Coulter’s readership.
But the founder of Jewish World Review, an online magazine that publishes Coulter’s syndicated column, isn’t buying her excuse.
“She could have been drunk, she could have been high, I don’t know, I have to give her the benefit of the doubt…but I don’t have to delude myself,” Binyamin Jolkovsky, who has served as the publication’s editor-in-chief for nearly 18 years, told The Daily Beast. “Pandering to Jewish money is about as anti-Semitic a stereotype as you could put forth. Her ‘eff-ing Jews’ comment is not identifying Israel—it’s identifying Jews, plural, and all Jews. There is no excuse for that. You can’t just wiggle out of something that vile and hateful.”
Coulter’s work has been appearing on Jewish World Review since at least January 2000. The day after Coulter’s now-infamous tweet, Jolkovsky’s website posted a new Coulter “insight” titled, “Donald Trump: The only people who like him are the voters.” Later that day, an editor’s note was added to her op-ed reading, “This column was prepared before the author’s anti-Semitic rant. JWR reached out to her and awaits her reply.”
So far, Jolkovsky says, it’s been radio silence.
“I have not heard back from her yet, no,” Jolkovsky said. “I called the syndicate, and initially they asked me to speak to her copy editor, and they said—I’m not making this up—that her copy editor will explain to me why she did what she did. I was like, I don’t think so.”
Jolkovsky, who is an Orthodox Jew and Republican voter, says that he has long maintained a personal working relationship with Coulter, and that this is the first time she has not emailed him back in a timely manner.
“It’s like when you have a friend and then the friend totally disses you, [even though] you’ve always been there for that friend,” he said. “It hurts.”
When asked if he is considering pulling Coulter’s column from his site, Jolkovsky said he hasn’t made a decision yet, but that “there are a lot of readers who want that to happen.”
“Let’s take Dana Milbank at The Washington Post, and imagine he wrote, ‘eff-ing blacks,’ you don’t think The Washington Post wouldn’t fire him on the spot?” he offered as an analogy. “It boggles the mind…I am hoping that she’s finished her tantrum and that she honestly understands what she’s done.”
