resources
Thursday, February 18, 2010 | return to: news & features, local


Share
 

Controversial Berkeley paper to cease printing

by stacey palevsky, staff writer

Follow j. on   and 

People who want to read the Berkeley Daily Planet’s steady stream of anti-Israel letters will no longer be able to pick up the paper at newsstands.

The planet announced last week it would cease publishing a print version of its weekly paper and become an online-only publication.

Of several factors cited for the change, the paper’s publisher and editor, Michael and Becky O’Malley, singled out one group for particular blame — “a few misguided zealots who represent themselves as friends of Israel.”

They have “certainly contributed to our advertising problems in some measure,” Becky O’Malley wrote in an open letter to readers Feb. 11.

BAdaily planet Sinkinson, Jim
Jim Sinkinson
However, in a phone interview Feb. 16, she clarified that remark.

“I actually do not want people to blame Berkeley’s Jewish community for our financial difficulties, because it’s not fair,” O’Malley said. “We’re having the same problems as every other paper. … It really is ‘it’s the economy, stupid.’ ”

Jim Sinkinson, one of the so-called “zealots” and the head of the group East Bay Citizens for Journalistic Responsibility, said the O’Malleys’ decision was bittersweet for him.

“Our preference would have been that the Planet would have seen fit to stop offending the Jewish community and to focus on creating a healthy viable wholesome community newspaper,” said Sinkinson, an Oakland resident.

Still, he said he was pleased that his efforts to alert Berkeley businesses and advertisers to the Daily Planet’s controversial content finally appeared to be successful.

“I think it is a tribute to the conscious and the moral sensibilities of the merchants of Berkeley that so many have chosen to avoid association with a publication that prints anti-Semitism,” he said.

The O’Malleys purchased the Berkeley Daily Planet in 2003. The paper, which they estimate has about 40,000 readers, offers a near-guarantee that it will publish, in full, any signed letter to the editor, regardless of topic or length.

That policy drew heated criticism in 2006, when the paper published an op-ed titled “Zionist Crimes in Lebanon” by an Iranian student studying in India. Among other charges, the author blamed anti-Semitism over the past 2,500 years on Jewish behavior and Jewish racism.

Since then, an onslaught of anti-Israel and anti-Semitic letters have been printed in the Daily Planet’s pages — leading East Bay Jews to spring into action. Berkeley resident John Gertz started a Web site called DP Watchdog, and people such as Sinkinson and Dan Spitzer of Berkeley informed advertisers about articles and letters the Daily Planet was printing.

BAdaily planet Berkeley mast head“We passionately support free speech. It is hate speech we do not support,” Sinkinson said. “It is within Planet’s right to publish anything they want … We just don’t think it’s good business for merchants to advertise in a publication that offends so many people.”

Becky O’Malley said it’s difficult to quantify how much advertising has been lost due to the efforts of people like Sinkinson. “In a bad economy, people are canceling their advertising for all kinds of reasons,” she said.

Sagging advertising revenue is only one piece of the Daily Planet’s struggles.

In a Feb. 4 article, the publication announced that its payroll company had recently vanished, “leaving behind a trail of unpaid taxes and embezzlement charges,” which could add up to “staggering sums for which we may be held liable.”

The paper will publish a print version through the end of February. From March on, it will rely on its one paid staff writer and a cadre of volunteer writers, editors and videographers who will contribute Web content.


Comments

Posted by Friscokind
02/19/2010  at  01:39 AM
Good to see this paper dispatch to

trash - where it belongs

Login to reply to this comment or post your own
Posted by Abraham Miller
02/19/2010  at  05:28 PM
Berkeley Daily Planet

Irrespective of who or what really caused the demise of the BDP (Berkeley’s Der Strummer), up until the time the corpse was beginning to desiccate, our front line of defense, the organized Jewish community, was absent from the conflict.  It is unfortunate, if true, that a group of “zealots,” accomplished what those with sinecures, mandates, and resources proved incapable of doing. Der Strummer should have been dealt with long ago. I suspect our “front line of defense” was too engaged in bringing attorneys to its board meetings, in an effort to stifle dissent, and worrying about Super Sunday to do anything significant.  When they call, remember what Nancy Reagan said about drugs: “Just say, ‘No.’”  We should find these so called “zealots” and fund them.

Login to reply to this comment or post your own
Posted by elliotc02
02/19/2010  at  06:09 PM
Organizational Failure

At a time when anti-semitism is once again becoming respectable, almost pervasive in Western Europe, it’s good to see that individuals like Jim Sinkinson and John Gertz stepped up against the Jew-hating, millionaire O’Malley’s filth. But as the above writer noted, where was the organized, salaried Community on this? When Berkeley’s weekly newspaper is bought and turned into a vehicle of anti-Israel propaganda or the Jewish Film Festival is hijacked, it would be appropriate for the institutions of the Jewish people of the Bay Area to act zealously on their behalf.

Login to reply to this comment or post your own
Posted by grf
02/19/2010  at  07:15 PM
Free speech for whom?

Sinkinson claims,”“We passionately support free speech. It is hate speech we do not support.”

Ah, thank you for that distinction, Mr. Sinkinson, now if we could figure out what the hell it means. How does one define “hate speech” and who is to be in charge of the defining? And since when has hate speech, however defined, not been protected under our common doctrine of free speech? I take it you and the so-called East Bay Citizens for Journalistic Responsibility have chosen yourselves to define what entails “hate speech” for the rest of us. I fail to be comforted.

Login to reply to this comment or post your own
Posted by Jack Kessler
02/22/2010  at  08:38 PM
For whom indeed?

All too many people form and express the most sweeping moral and political judgments of condemnation of Israel and of all its works.  Yet those same people nevertheless feel entitled to cavil over the Jewish community forming moral and political judgments about such minor matters as whether a local newspaper is hate speech or not.

I think the Jewish community was every bit as much right to characterize the Daily Planet as hate speech as the enemies of Israel have to denounce Israel.  Either one is entitled to form judgments or one isn’t.

Login to reply to this comment or post your own



Leave a Comment

In order to post a comment, you must first log in.
Are you looking for user registration? Or have you forgotten your password?



Auto-login on future visits