Green Room

Charles Blow apologizes for religious insult, NYT ready to ‘move on’

posted at 12:27 pm on February 25, 2012 by

A minor controversy erupted this week over an insensitive Twitter comment made during Wednesday’s debate by New York Times op-ed writer Charles Blow. Reacting to an observation by Mitt Romney on the difficulties facing children raised in single-parent homes, Blow tweeted:

Let me just tell you this Mitt ‘Muddle Mouth’: I’m a single parent and my kids are amazing! Stick that in your magic underwear.

Those curious final two words were an unkind reference to a Mormon tradition of wearing a “temple garment” under clothing to symbolize one’s devotion to God (think yarmulke if you’re seeking a parallel in another religion).

Predictably conservative commentators jumped all over the tweet, liberals not so much. Among the former was James Taranto, who pointed out that the comment “was not only bigoted but completely gratuitous. [Blow] was apparently set off by Romney’s debate comments … which had nothing to do with the candidate’s religion.”

Taranto also noted that Blow apologized on Friday, tweeting:

Btw, the comment I made about Mormonism during Wed.’s debate was inappropriate, and I regret it. I’m willing to admit that with no caveats.

One might argue that the “btw” makes it something of a half-hearted apology, or one issued as an afterthought, but an apology is an apology, right? Er, that depends on the apologizer and the apoplogizee. In another recent dustup over an “insensitive” remark by another journalist, heads rolled. And the bigotry in that case—over the use of the word chink in a headline that also included the name of a Knicks point guard of Asian extraction—was open to interpretation. ESPN’s Anthony Federico insisted he was not trying to be “cute” in writing the headline, but he was fired all the same. In Blow’s case, there is no ambiguity. So will the Times be taking disciplinary action?

The National Review’s Jim Geraghty posed that question to the paper’s ombudsman Arthur Brisbane and received this response:

I agree this type of tweet isn’t a good idea. I have generally taken the view that ad hominem attacks are problematic journalistically (see link below to a column I write about a Joe Nocera piece). And I personally disagree with criticizing anyone based on religious belief. Because the writer in this case is an Op-Ed writer, whose opinions are his own, I do not plan to intervene to disagree with the opinion itself. But I think tweets of this kind are a mistake.

Short form: Nothing to look at here. Move along.

But at least it was comforting to learn that the Times ombudsman takes a dim view of religious bigotry. He would probably take offense at a blog post penned in April of 2009 that addressed the Vermont legislature’s passage of a same-sex marriage bill, in which the writer explained that this “victory” for gay rights was easy to predict because Vermonters are enlightened enough to eschew religion in their lives. The writer also opined parenthetically:

It’s baffling how intelligent people try to derive a well-rounded set of modern mores from books written by men who didn’t even know that the world was round. But, I digress.

The author, needless to say, is Charles Blow.

Related Articles

Follow me on Twitter or join me at Facebook. You can reach me at howard.portnoy@gmail.com or by posting a comment below.

 

Recently in the Green Room:

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Hmm, I wonder what would have happened if Mr. Blow had said something about Islam in a desparaging manner??????

SubDoc on February 25, 2012 at 12:57 PM

Charles Blowme only knows the world is round because someone told him. There is that woman on The View tho who was very surprised to learn it.

I wonder when exactly he thinks people figured out the world was round. It was much earlier than the 15th century.

JohnBrown on February 25, 2012 at 1:03 PM

Twitter, FB seem to lend themselves to imprudent blurting. Still, there’s a chance we’ll grow out of it.

jeanie on February 25, 2012 at 1:24 PM

the “chink in the armor” guy was fired for making an accidental insult. but this guy gets forgiven, for making an insult on purpose!!

Hmm, I wonder what would have happened if Mr. Blow had said something about Islam in a desparaging manner??????

SubDoc on February 25, 2012 at 12:57 PM

i always think about that, every time something like this happens. “what if that had been done to a muslim?” or another question, what if it were homophobic? hmm.

Sachiko on February 25, 2012 at 1:26 PM

The right needs to accept the apology and move on. What are we, liberals?

J.E. Dyer on February 25, 2012 at 1:29 PM

Hmm, I wonder what would have happened if Mr. Blow had said something about Islam in a desparaging manner??????

+a million

veryapropos on February 25, 2012 at 1:34 PM

Man, he really “Blow’s”. :)

chickie on February 25, 2012 at 2:07 PM

It’s baffling how intelligent people try to derive a well-rounded set of modern mores from books written by men who didn’t even know that the world was round. But, I digress.

There are no Bible writers that refer to the planet as being anything but circular. Blow hasn’t done his research and has confused the writers of the scriptures with the bishops and popes that persecuted Copernicus & Galileo over a millennium later.

L.N. Smithee on February 25, 2012 at 2:28 PM

It’s baffling how intelligent people try to derive a well-rounded set of modern mores from books written by men who didn’t even know that the world was round. But, I digress.

As if Blow would know that the Earth is round if someone else hadn’t explained and taught him such.

RJL on February 25, 2012 at 3:03 PM

Because the writer in this case is an Op-Ed writer, whose opinions are his own, I do not plan to intervene to disagree with the opinion itself. But I think tweets of this kind are a mistake.

It’s painful to even sort-of agree with the NYT, but in this case the Ombudsman has 2 valid points: a tweet is not a headline, and an opinion-writer is not a news-writer.

Still,
it’s so thoughtful of Mr. Charles Blow
to confirm what we already know:
the staff at the Times
views Conservative “crimes”
(like religion) as dreadfully low.

AesopFan on February 25, 2012 at 3:53 PM

What are we, liberals?

J.E. Dyer on February 25, 2012 at 1:29 PM

New /sarc tag now available for general use.

AesopFan on February 25, 2012 at 3:55 PM

Btw, the comment I made about Mormonism during Wed.’s debate was inappropriate, and I regret it. I’m willing to admit that with no caveats.

Blow remembered Harry Reid’s Mormonism.

itsnotaboutme on February 25, 2012 at 4:16 PM

So let me get this straight. ESPN’s headline with a phrase that contains the word “chink” in regard to a Chinese American is “open to interpretation”, but we’re supposed to get up in arms about Charles Blows’s “magic pants” tweet to his twitter followers? Careful now Howard or you might just get labeled a “serial cringer.”

This is your third post this week about the “chink in the armor” story. I Can’t wait to see how you fit it in to tomorrow’s post. /s

weathermen on February 25, 2012 at 5:10 PM

Maybe if the Mormons threaten to storm the offices of the NYT…?

Naw, too well behaved…me thinks the NYT Op-Ed board needs a new nanny…preferably one with steel toed boon dockers to remind them of civility

BlaxPac on February 26, 2012 at 1:22 PM