Drawing the line on Holocaust humor

Idyllic Reed campus embroiled in debate over limits of satire

By POLINA OLSEN

article created on:

Articles in a satiric newsletter published by Reed College students are prompting discussions on anti-Semitism, responsibility in journalism and free speech. The Pamphlette, a two-page weekly, routinely mocks everybody and everything. Now some say it’s gone too far.

Some, like Reed senior Leslie Zukor, trace problems to a December 2008 article under the headline “Diary of Pam Frank Unearthed.” In this story, fictional researchers discover the diary of Anne Frank’s sister: “August 1, 1944: Anne’s Nazi friends showed up today. I guess they want to take us to a camp or something. I am so happy that I can finally work on my tan! Everyone else seemed really sad about leaving, but I can’t wait to get out of here. I’m really looking forward to finally taking a nice, hot shower.”

Then, Andrew Michaan’s September 2009 article headlined “The Real Scoop on History” included this text: “Many people think that
the Holocaust was the tragic, systemic genocide of approximately six million Jews during WWII… In reality, none of this ever happened.”

In fairness, the article was not only about the Holocaust. It postulated, among other things, that “Christopher Columbus was an ethnically neutral robot.”

After Michaan’s article appeared, Zukor went to Dean of Students Mike Brody who Zukor said sympathized with her but upheld free speech. Unsatisfied, Zukor wrote an article for the student newspaper in which she suggested the Pamphlette avoid anti-Semitic content and stated in regard to the offending content, “While such a statement may strike people as harmless, it does nothing but enable the real Holocaust-deniers.”

Michaan answered with “A Response to Leslie Zukor” in which he apologized for hurt caused by the Pamphlette. He added, “You continue to read our publication every week and look for a reason to be offended. The major flaw in your article is you do not understand satire.”

In a telephone interview Michaan said, “I cannot fathom how anyone could be offended by [The Real Scoop on History]. It makes fun of people who deny the Holocaust.”

The situation worsened, however, on Oct. 5 when the Pamphlette printed an article under the headline “LC (Lewis and Clark College) Students Kill Jewish People,” by Chip Williams.

Michaan said William’s article took Zukor’s argument that making light of the Holocaust paves the way for future genocides “to its logical conclusion” in a satirical scenario of editorial incitement to genocide at Lewis and Clark after the appearance there of The Leaphlette, a fictional newspaper like Tthe Pamphlette. Lewis and Clark has no publication called the Leaphlette. Williams’ story includes no factual content about Lewis and Clark College publications.

Unfortunately, Lewis and Clark recently experienced a troubling incident where Swastikas were found in a campus library restroom. College administrators immediately contacted the Jewish Federation of Greater Portland for guidance in developing policies and activities to help prevent future issues.

“Given the sensitivity of the situation on campus, this article added insult to injury,” said Jodi Heintz, director of public relations at Lewis and Clark. “Our goal in this has been to enhance dialog and create transparency in handling this situation and dealing with matters of diversity.”

The Pamphlette staff deny any knowledge of the Swastika incident. Michaan said Lewis and Clark was a metaphor for Reed. “We didn’t think anyone from Lewis and Clark would read it,” he said. “It was a lapse in judgment.”

William’s article included the following material:

“In what is being called a ‘tragic but all too predictable event,’ the staff of The Leaphlette, a student humor publication at Lewis and Clark College, have been accused of rounding up and gassing all of the Jews on their Portland, OR campus. …

“…Some students have claimed that the incident highlights the need for a multicultural resource center… ‘If only we’d had a group of people who put their sensibilities on a hair trigger and sat around, waiting to be offended,…then all those poor Jews would still be alive.’”

“…The most tragic part of this whole debacle…than all those dead Jews, is the damage that I fear will be done to the school’s reputation.”

Reed President Colin Diver emailed a campus-wide apology in the aftermath of the incident.

The Pamphlette also apologized in print: “Our intentions have never been to hurt members of the Reed community.” They invited everyone to a Student Honor Council sponsored forum.

Meanwhile, Reed students Katy Joseph and Adriel Hsu-Flanders worked with campus groups on a response. Hsu-Flanders saw the article as an attempt to intimidate and silence people offended by the Pamphlette. “I sent [the Williams article] to Lewis and Clark as soon as I found it,” Hsu-Flanders said in a telephone interview. He believed the school had a right to know since the article included their name.
Joseph sought support from Portland’s Jewish organizations. “It’s scary to think that students would be going through this whole thing alone,” she said.

Bob Horenstein, JFGP community relations director, arranged for a JFGP representative at the upcoming Reed forum, invited Leslie Zukor to the next Community Relations Executive Committee meeting and called Reed’s Brody (Reed’s dean of students).

“Reed put together a forum but the administration has a hands-off approach,” Horenstein later said referring to the campus constitution that prevents administrative censorship or editorial oversight of publications funded by student fees. He arranged further discussions with Brody and hopes to work with the Reed administration and their philosophy.

“We’ve suggested having a Holocaust survivor speak on campus, particularly with the students who write and publish The Pamphlette,” Horenstein said. “We’ve also suggested that a satirist come out so they can understand where the red lines are between tasteful satire and hateful speech. We hope to use this as an educational opportunity.”

Joseph continued working on the forum planning committee but ran into problems when she felt compelled to reveal confidential information. A member of the student senate Joseph was bound by an agreement not to divulge internal email.

“It was confidentiality used to misrepresent the intentions of the government body,” she said of the current circumstances. “I repeated that an email had suggested many [senators] thought [the Williams article] was funny and that another senator said we haven’t heard enough people upset about this so we don’t have to do anything.”

The senate expelled Joseph from the body for releasing confidential information and failing to apologize.

Two days after the Pamphlette apologized, they printed an article laced with blacked-out words intended to convey censorship. The next day, more than 200 people came to the forum.

“The forum was unproductive because of the attitude both sides had going into it,” said Michaan.

Zukor felt otherwise. “I’m appalled that the editors of the Pamphlette don’t take responsibility for their actions,” she said.

“In the aftermath of this drama,” Hsu-Flanders said, “we have too much focus on one article. We avoid the larger conversation—how satire creates these things where nothing is sacred. Genocide should never be joked about.”

Glenn Harrison, Pamphlette editor and author of “The Diary of Pam Frank,” wrote: “While I personally believe that the Holocaust is something that can and should be a target for humor, I think I can speak for most of the staff saying that we regret our editorial negligence in allowing this delicate subject to be satirized in the way it was.” He said he believed, “the heart of the problem is people taking [the Williams story] out of context.”

“The most frustrating aspect of this ordeal,” said Joseph, “has been dealing with this attitude that because you’re in an intellectual environment there’s nothing that is out of bounds.”