Joel Schalit

The Liberal Arts

   
Ron Nachmann is an Israeli-American journalist based in San Francisco. A close friend and colleague, we’ve worked together at a number of different periodicals, including Tikkun, where Ron served as music editor. Now a contributor to Zeek, his latest article, a review of Tom Segev’s 1967: Israel, the War and the Year That Transformed the Middle East, was published in the December issue. It’s not only a marvelous piece of writing on an incredibly complex and politically loaded book. Ron’s essay is an excellent introduction to the politics of writing about Israeli history.

The appropriately-titled Continuity has finally arrived. A CD/DVD by the Tokyo-based, Polish sound artist Zbigniew Karkowski (in collaboration with Japanese videographer Atsuko Nojiri), this unorthodox career retrospective is the last project we signed when I was Asphodel‘s label manager. Already receiving excellent reviews in Europe from publications such as Vital Weekly, given press like this, I have the sneaking suspicion that Continuity will cement Karkowski’s reputation as one of the world’s most forward-thinking electronic musicians.

Changing Channels

Speaking of Al Jazeera English, if you get the chance, check out  Roger Cohen‘s excellent op-ed on the Qatari broadcaster in today’s New York Times.

Discussing the difficulties that the service has had trying to find national distribution from America’s cable and satellite providers, the Times‘ International-Writer-at-Large extols the network’s virtues, noting, in reference to the same polarized context invoked in Friday‘s posting, that Al Jazeera is carried (by Yes) in Israel, where it replaced the BBC last winter.

Incidentally (and much discussed as of late) Al Jazeera English was also slated to replace CNN on Israel’s largest cable service, Hot, but was outbid at the last minute by Fox News.

Covering the Coverage

His curiosity piqued by a recent article in Haaretz discussing the relative merits of the New York Times‘ coverage of Israel, a colleague asked me if I could point him to what I think are the best studies of Western media reporting on the Arab-Israeli conflict. For those who understand the subtext of such inquiries,  the editor couldn’t have asked a more loaded question. To make such a request in today’s environment means that you first have to ask why the question is important, and second, for whom.

Since September 11th, domestic coverage of the Middle East has obviously become more significant. Not just because the attacks on New York and Washington signaled the beginning of a conflict  between America and West Asian Islamists. But, also because of how it placed far more editorial requirements on a news media already struggling – and, in the US, largely failing – to meet the complex cultural demands already required of Mideast coverage by the country’s Jewish and Muslim Diaspora communities.

US news agencies haven’t done the best job of striking this balance yet either. However, there is more English-language, Mideast-based media to rely on than ever before to make up for it. Take for example, Israeli publications like the English edition of Haaretz on the one hand, and Al Jazeera‘s English broadcasting service on the other, not to mention all of the translated editions of regional sources in between. Americans now have every opportunity to read news that’s potentially more informative.

Though "local" is not always a synonym for "better", irrespective of partisanship and the limitations international media inevitably find themselves subject to, in comparison, few domestic sources, including the ethnic press, deliver the same quality goods.  Does that mean that American periodicals should hang up their hats? No. Because of this country’s obvious ties to the region – economic, cultural, and military, to name a few – US news outlets are morally obligated to continue reporting on the Mideast.

The question is how. Obviously, one answer would be to create content that was complementary with a foreign reporting that is better privileged for information. Another angle would be to concentrate on commissioning work on the numerous ways in which Americans deliberate about their involvement in a particular country’s affairs. Thus, you emphasize domestic political discussions at, say the State Department, or, amongst Americans with cultural ties to said state, instead of the other way around.

As many editors at American news periodicals will tell you, the two biggest complaints about Mideast coverage are always that its either anti-Semitic, or similarly compromised by a desire to satisfy special interest groups. The problem with such criticisms is that they’re not only frequently incorrect. But, most importantly, that they help divert editorial attention away from very real ethical problems, like learning how to properly tailor international news for a cosmopolitan, multicultural readership – during wartime.   

- From my notebook, Nov 1.

Left of the Middle East

From an unpublished conversation with a Jewish magazine editor

We have a terrible disjuncture at present, where the critical coverage that we increasingly rely on in this country comes from progressive sources that aren’t as discriminating in their approach to the Middle East as they should be. Being rightly committed to criticizing imperialism and colonialism, they frequently make the mistake of seeing all of the disparate crises afflicting the region as being different versions of the same political problem. It’s like saying that all Jews or Arabs are identical.

Take a look at how the occupation of Iraq has impacted a lot of progressive reporting on Israel: As the occupation has worsened, it has increasingly conditioned a way of covering the country that has assimilated Israel’s conflict with the Palestinians with the situation created by the Americans in Iraq. The problem is that if this is the general disposition of the left press in covering the region, it therefore makes it difficult to explain the very real differences that distinguish the Iraqi refugee crisis from the Palestinian, Kurdish, or Armenian refugee crises which preceded it.

The Middle East is a very big place. Even within the space of short distances, such as that which exists between Gaza and Ramallah, the cultural and political distinctions can be extraordinary. The irony is that this is partially a product of territorial divisions first introduced by Europeans to the area. We ought to encourage the journalists we work with to strike a better balance between understanding the Middle Eastern experience of the West with the domestic differences that the outside world seems so oblivious towards.

From Here to Epitome

Exhibit A

Exhibit B

In July, we started to receive a complimentary ‘subscription’ to The San Francisco Examiner. By featuring musicians like Nick Cave and Yo La Tengo on its cover, this historically conservative (and now free) tabloid appears to be intent on capturing my specific demographic: post-punk professionals who came of age in the early 1990s. In other words, the Nirvana generation.

I find such explicit overtures annoying because American news periodicals always over-emphasize their music coverage when they don’t know who their readership is. I can’t tell you how many editorial meetings I’ve attended over the years where an editor has asked the staff to "up" the coverage of cool bands when they’re worried that they’re not reaching a younger audience.

Just look at the headlines above to see what I mean. Fifty-year old Nick Cave "Gets Rowdy", fourty something Yo La Tengo "Still Has It." Its the kind of self-conscious headline writing that speaks reams about what the editors are really worried about: the vitality and worth of their newspaper.

Covering Israel

From an essay in progress

Turn to any progressive periodical in the United States today, and in all likelihood, you’ll find at least one article about the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. From large circulation monthlies such as Z Magazine, and the American Prospect, to weeklies like The Nation and online dailies such as Counterpunch and Salon, reporting on the region tends to reflexively match events on the ground, either in the form of investigative articles or opinion editorials.

Coverage of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict by America’s left press has traditionally focused on the occupation of the West Bank and Gaza, and the plight of Palestinians living under Israeli military rule. This emphasis was sharpened during the course of the two intifadas (1987-1991 and 2000-2005) and the peace process of the 1990s, when settlement building actually increased, and the Israel Defense Forces inaugurated its policy of geographical bisections and closures in the ‘territories.

Since the invasion of Iraq in March 2003, this area of coverage has expanded to include analyses of Israel’s relationship with the United States, with a specific emphasis on the role of the “Israel Lobby” in formulating US foreign policy towards the Islamic world. Reflecting ongoing concerns about Israel’s purported impact on the US decision to go to war with Iraq, in the eyes of many progressive magazine editors, Israel is no longer just an occupying power, but an inordinately influential, and frequently manipulative party to US efforts to dominate the Middle East.

When it comes to domestic Israeli politics, progressive periodicals pay little attention to it, except when it holds importance for the country’s peace prospects. Thus, when trade unionist Amir Peretz was elected head of Israel’s Labor Party in November 2005, progressive periodicals welcomed his appointment, hoping that, given Peretz’ leftwing background, he would reinvigorate the peace process. Similarly, when Israel Beitenu chief Avigdor Lieberman was appointed ‘Minister of Strategic Threats’ in 2006, given his ultra-nationalist politics, Lieberman’s appointment was heralded as a threat to peace.

[For my outgoing editor's take on how Tikkun covered Israel, click here.]

Turn on the News

Two years ago, I saw a colleague of mine on the German news program, Journal.  A frequent guest on the show, he always provided the Israeli view whenever there was an important event to comment on in the Middle East. After sending Robert an email to let him know I’d seen him on TV, surprised, he asked what I was doing watching German television. “Television news stinks here in the US,” I remember writing back to him. “The offerings are nowhere near as good as what you get in Israel. We try and watch as many European news programs as we can.”

Eating dinner last night, I recalled my conversation with Robert as I watched our latest local news import, Russia Today. Hosted by local public television station Channel 32, RT provides an amusing Russian take on international news. Viewing two segments – one on the debate about the establishment of US anti-missile bases in the Czech Republic, the other, the Venezuelan government’s granting of sweeping new powers to President Hugo Chavez – I was immediately struck by how nostalgic RT was for the Cold War. Speaking to Czech opponents of the American initiative and Venezuelan supporters of Chavez, Russia Today’s reporters made no bones about their biases. Anything that irritated the US was fine by them.

As someone who spent their teens in the US during the 1980s, to have imagined watching a Russian program on American television would have been unthinkable. Let alone, a Russian news broadcaster supportively reporting on the progress an arch-enemy was making in consolidating their revolution. By no means a politically progressive show, (witness RT’s endless profiles of successful Russian entrepeneurs) it was still a hoot taking this aspect of Russia’s political temperature as I switched back and forth between RT, Larry King Live, and yet another annoying Benny Hill rerun on the BBC.

“I hear that we’re going to be getting better programming in the near future,” I remember telling Robert in Tel Aviv as we sat together in his apartment watching live footage of Saddam Hussein’s trial. ” I sure hope so,” he replied, pointing to his TV and laughing. “Imagine if you could watch events like this. Its totally unprecedented to see such things, even here, in Israel.”

Given the eclecticism of contemporary Israeli media consumption, that, I’m sure of. For example, in December, the Guardian reported that Israel’s largest sattelite TV provider, Yes, had dropped BBC World from its roster in favor of the new al-Jazeera English network. Say what? Despite all of the criticisms levelled at the BBC’s Israeli coverage in recent years,  an Arab broadcaster beat out a longstanding British news outlet for sattelite television subscribers. How’s that for counter-intuitive.

When asked to comment on this, an Israeli relative of mine told me, “All the right-wingers are saying its Arab Israelis who demanded this change. Honestly, I think it was Jews. How else would the Ashkenazim who don’t speak Arabic know what the Arab world is thinking?”

Back on the home front in San Francisco, our viewing preference remains BBC World. Every morning, Jennifer and I sit in bed and watch a full hour’s broadcast while we drink our coffee and read the newspaper. Even though its only an hour long (and only in the morning,) between this, Deutsche Welle, and even Russia Today, its still a hell of a lot better than relying solely on CNN. Nevertheless, we hear from our cable provider that they’ll be adding a dedicated BBC World news channel very soon.

My New Job(s)

Its been nine days since I left Tikkun. Unwinding has not been easy. As I imagined, there would be email and calls to answer, and loose ends to help the accountant and staff sew up. I’d wager that at least three days were devoted to helping the office out, which is actually less time than I anticipated would be the case. Having spent six weeks at the office after resigning on November 22nd, I dedicated myself to wrapping up as much as humanly possible. I’m sure that there will be more calls and emails in the future. But for now, until the magazine hires a new managing editor, its my assumption that my major post-Tikkun work is complete.

Every time I find myself growing impatient with my inability to get going on my next projects faster – a book, a record and two essays – I always look back at my “To Do” list for December to remind myself of why I’m so damn beat. (That does not include the fatigue accumulated from having worked six days a week for two and a half years.) Ranging from IT, distribution and general business tasks to editorial planning, writing, updating the website and employee training, the six week period during which I undertook my concluding work sums up everything that made my former job so draining. I’m really grateful for the experience, but I’m also extremely relieved to be moving on.

The best part about being home is how comfortable it is to write in. Ever since we moved into our new house in San Francisco’s Bernal Heights neighborhood two years ago, unfortunately, given my work schedule, I’ve had a devil of a time finding any real occasion to spend time here. Every weekday morning, when I’d get up to make coffee before work, I’d stare into my beautiful office, wondering whether I’d ever get a chance to enjoy the space and take advantage of what it ideally could afford me. Lined with books and vinyl LPs, and a large desk bearing my home studio set-up, sitting in my decrepit Berkeley office, I’d frequently find myself daydreaming about importing old records bought at foreign flea markets into my rapidly aging computer.

Now that I’m truly here, I can’t say enough good things about it. The sun shines through my window for the better part of the day, giving my room some of the best light of any spot in the house. Sitting in my father’s old office chair, typing away while my favorite BBC shows stream through my Mac and my two dogs chill on the floor beside me, I can’t quite recall a time that I felt so at home. Really, anywhere. Though this definitely will not last forever -  essentially five months from today – it feels like I won the lottery. And I don’t feel the least bit guilty about this opportunity either.

As much as this all might seem like its about finally doing what one really wants to do, that’s not quite it. It’s about having a decent quality of life, and the time to take care of the kinds of things that we ignore, delay, or put off when we work sixty hours a week. Like spending time with one’s family, paying bills promptly, returning phone calls from friends (the same day, as opposed to two weeks later), and doing laundry.  And, most importantly, cooking dinner for my wife.  Seeing the smile on Jennifer’s face as she sat down to a freshly-grilled flank steak last night summed up exactly why this was one of the best decisions I’ve ever made. All I can say in response is “Sweetie, there’s a lot more meat where that came from.”

And We All Fall Down

By now, you’ve probably heard the news: America’s biggest boutique magazine distributor closed its doors on December 27th. By no means a surprise, the closure of the Indy Press Newsstand Services (formerly known as Big Top) remains a big blow to independent periodicals in the US. A significant number of its former clients remain owed substantial sums of money – including my former magazine, Tikkun. While Tikkun will be fine (we left the IPA a year ago), it remains unclear whether many of its former clients are going to survive.

In the interim, the IPA’s inability to pay its titles have resulted in the closure of a number of outstanding national magazines, including the award-winning Clamor, and the end of the print edition of one of America’s best up-and-coming music publications, Grooves. (Interesting to note that in all of the online discussions of the IPA’s closure, no one has said anything about this specific periodical’s status.) One of the first  reported casualties of the IPA’s financial misanthropy, Grooves stopped appearing on newsstands in 2005. In 2006, it relaunched as a web magazine.

As a publisher, the most important lesson I learned from the IPA debacle is how much it underlined the continuing crisis of professionalization in indie culture. For example, every time I’d go to the IPA’s office to attend a sales meeting, I was continually reminded to be ‘more professional’ regarding design and editorial considerations. For a brief while, I found myself grateful for these talks. I already had a strong background in distribution, and had been hired in part to help shore up the business end of things.

But, as time wore on and the issue was increasingly invoked, I began to wonder whether the subject’s continuous reappearance in our business discussions was symptomatic of something far more worrysome. When our regular sales statements and payments  eventually halted, and allegations of poor accounting and distro fee collections emerged, I finally understood what all of this talk about  being ‘more professional’ was all about. The IPA was failing to perform its most basic functions as a distributor. To put it bluntly, the company could barely tie its own shoelaces.

For any firm, administrative incompetence is always a recipe for disaster. Unfortunately, such imperfections are common to many independent businesses, and have more often than not led to their downfall. What troubles me most is not the fact that the IPA was not an exception to the rule, but the cultural consequences of its failings. Through its mismanagement, the IPA put an entire wing of the American periodical business in crisis. Some would even go so far as to say that the IPA killed it. I’m not just talking about any community either. I’m speaking about the countless number of publications which grew up in the turn of the century indie publishing scene.

For the past thirty plus years, America has witnessed the growth of one of the most creative periodical industries in its history. Despite the fact that this business has weathered numerous ups and downs, it was not until the ‘zine explosion of the 1990s that independent periodical publishing in the US fully flowered, creating numerous special interest political and cultural titles expressing the enormous ingenuity and literary talent of an entire generation of artists, writers and designers. Not only did this milieu produce something culturally valid; it also created a market, which despite its small size, was sustainable, significant, and most importantly, politically influential.

And that is precisely the problem. The IPA’s ultimate crime was that it never took this milieu seriously enough to understand what it was putting at risk through its administrative incompetence. By failing to live up to its mandate to be a responsible “antidote to media monopoly,” the IPA helped irreperably damage a counterculture that was a proven platform for distributing alternative information and ideas. That is a horrible legacy to be responsible for. But it is one which ought to serve as a burning reminder of why the left still has to learn how to do business properly.