The Observer, February 24, 2006
Volume XXXVIII, Issue 18
Free Speech Zone: Holocaust advertisement offends, flares tempers
To the Editor:
I am shocked and appalled to see that The Observer would include an advertisement for a website that supports the denial of the Holocaust.
It may say that the purpose is to encourage open debate, but it is not. The purpose of it is to be inflammatory and legitimize their viewpoint. Their viewpoint is not legitimate, and you have an ethical
responsibility to not print this sort of trash. My grandmother is a holocaust survivor. My great grandparents were killed in the Nazi death camps, as were many people in my family and at least 9 million others. My grandmother had to watch as children, pregnant women, and the elderly were herded into the crematoria like sheep to be burned alive.
There is no excuse for this. There is no excuse for the denial of this. There is no excuse for legitimizing anyone who would do so.
I demand an apology and an immediate retraction of future ads from this group. I fully support freedom of speech, but freedom of speech does not imply an obligation on your part to print this nonsense. If this persists, I am sure will be joined by many others in a boycott of your newspaper. I hope that this is simply a misunderstanding; if you would like me to refer you to literature regarding the agenda of these Holocaust deniers, I would be happy to do so.
Ben Schiller
Undergraduate student
To the Editor:
First, I want to compliment you on the quality of the paper you publish.
However, I want to express my feelings of dismay and sadness at the advertisement I saw in the Feb. 10, 2006 issue for an organization calling itself the Committee for Open Debate on the Holocaust. This group is at the forefront in disseminating Holocaust denial literature in the United States and is one that targets college campuses in an attempt to distort factual history.
Just as I hope I will never see ads for the Ku Klux Klan, or the American Nazi Party or any organization that attempts to rewrite history and promote hatred in The Observer, I also hope that, even in the name of a free press, better judgment is used in the future on what is published.
Lia Chesner
Office of Faculty Affairs and Human
Resources
Editor's Note: The staff of The Observer in no way endorses the opinions or statements of the organizations that choose to advertise within the pages of this newspaper. As the newspaper of a private institution, The Observer can choose to run or reject any advertisement at any given time. However, the advertisement in question, which was paid for by an organization claiming "Academic Freedom" by holding "An open discussion about the Holocaust," is one that should have been rejected from the start and has no place in this paper. The Case community deserves to have its newspaper represent its ideals, which include tolerance and respect for others without regard to race, gender, religion, sexual orientation, or any other characteristic that may distinguish them from the rest.
While others may disagree with this explanation, citing freedom of the press as a justification for this mistake, that reasoning should only apply to messages and ideals that we truly advocate and are actually willing to stand up and fight for.
