Let me try once a bit detailed account of the key part of the conversation.
It starts with bigot call. This is very simple. Yes, a person can be called a bigot in accordance to its definition:
A bigot is a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices.
Sanchez called Jon a bigot the way he (Sanchez) sees it or perceives it. So, what? Many people called O’Reily a bigot despite the fact that he too will “engage” anyone holding an opposing view. However, upon examination of both, one can conclude that no amount of direct discussion with people holding an “opposing view” will dissuade either or make either change their opinion. In fact, the only thing having someone of the opposing team is that ratings go up and heated debate ensues (to an absurd excitement of the “loyal fan base”) that resolves nothing. Even further, having two people that hold opposing views for a full hour debating was tried before and died (Crossfire, anyone?).
Further, the article points out that Sanchez backtracked and corrected himself right during the interview so he, in fact, DOES NOT believe Jon is a bigot. How come everyone is skipping over that? Looks like bunch of kids in the playground screaming and pointing fingers.
Now, when the interviewer pointed out that Jon is Jewish I would first go on and say WTF that has to do with anything? That, to me, is the lowball slimy kind of setup that deserves contempt. However, some people go for it as it is too sweet to ignore. So Sanchez, I think, instead of saying “fu** you, idiot, that is totally stupid point to make ask me something else” wanted to reject that point by explaining that Jon in this time and age does not belong to a “minority” that requires special protection by citing examples of many Jews that are on the networks. Main reason Sanchez took that example is that Sanchez himself is part of the networks milieu and I think he was just saying that he does not see any Latinos or Blacks being high positioned executives on TV networks but rather Jews. That’s just an observatory fact easily Googled by anyone. So, he just said that if the members of a certain ethnicity or race hold some portion of the power in an important social element that media is viewed as, then it is not fair to call said ethnicity a minority.
Sanchez goes even further:
This sounds like a well though out statement to make. What’s wrong with this? Well, for one, it makes the guy look aware and less of an idiot and “we” dont want to make him look aware and less of an idiot so “we” will just skip over it like he did not say that at all. Go, figure!
What I don’t get is the actual intent of the interviewer to which Sanchez clearly responds - even if Jon was a member of a minority how does that disqualifies him from ever being a bigot himself? It’s just stupid claim by the interviewer.
To accuse the guy of anti-semitism, to my untrained Canadian ears, is totally whacked out. But, there is this mob mentality fueled, fed and executed by the media for anything that can be semantically construed as “deep seated hatred” that I pity anyone who has to work as a public figure because inevitably each of those public figures will at some point be faced with the question that in one way or another, even tangentially, touches on certain “minority” so they better memorize winning phrases right now.