Why do you think it’s important? You haven’t actually said anything about it, except explaining what happened. I don’t see why this is important. If you believe it’s important, then give us your view. Otherwise, what’s the point of the thread?
What is the connection between the plagiarism issue and the oath issue?
These issues are important because they involve the suppression of the expressions of ideas, concepts and points of view that are opposed by the suppressors. The point of the thread is to illustrate these occurrences.
Yes, hypocritical idiots like Ackman are hypocritical and stupid. There are lots of hypocrites and idiots out there. Still not sure how this is interesting or notable.
The plagiarism issue in regard to Gay is that it was used to oust her because of her congressional testimony concerning the 10/7 Hamas attack and Israel that Ackman found unacceptable. His hypocrisy was exposed when it was revealed that his wife also perpetrated plagiarism during her academic career but remained mum on the matter. Seeing as how plagiarism was used like a cudgel by Ackman to suppress speech critical of Israel and its asserted right to exist in regard to ideas of genocide and plagiarism is linked to Ackman, Springer’s oath comes into play because it may play a role in how he handles Ackman’s attacks on Business Insider and its writers.
I don’t understand this thread, I think, but I can tell you from my German perspective that Axel Springer has been a very very conservative publishing house for a long time. Our little Rupert Murdock. Axel Springer was the founder of the editing house after WWII, publishing first newspapers (most notably the Bild Zeitung), then recently going on-line and acquiring publications in the US and also Politico. I admit that I expected the Springer Group to ruin Politico much faster than they have: I still read it sometimes, and it has not completely tanked. It is still a good source of information for news and insider stories about the European Union, for instance, which other publications do not cover in detail.
Now I cannot fathom what the OP is trying to point out with his opening statement: yes, Axel Springer has an agenda. It is a bit confused and contradictory. Its main elements seem to be anti-communism, being staunchly pro-Israel, panem et circensis for the masses, and a hefty dose of hypocrisy. What this has to do with Bill Ackman, Neri Oxman and Claudine Gay is beyond my grasp.
Understood.
It has to do with the suppression of criticism of Israel using plagiarism as a cudgel, the hypocrisy behind its wielding, and the suppression of criticism of Israel by way of Springer’s oath.
From the OP:
“Germany’s infamous legacy in regard to its Jewish genocide in the early 20th Century impels many Germans to treat Jewish issues with kid gloves, obviating critical treatment of these issues.”
Asking an actual German perspective on this. Your version the “White Guilt Complex.” Years ago, the standard line was that the postwar generation of Germans so repudiated the previous generation’s complicity in the Holocaust that they responded with activism when Israel behaved in any way resembling that towards Palestinians. (Although you never saw them do much about the inarguably Nazi- behaving regimes of the same era: South Africa, Argentina, Indonesia, etc.)
I think it’s more specifically “Nazi Guilt Complex.”