Galliano found guilty of racism. A short postscript on the Guardian’s initial coverage

Here was the Guardian’s first report about accusations, in late February, that fashion guru, John Galliano had uttered ugly antisemitic remarks (including praise of Hitler) to Jewish patrons in a Paris bar, by the paper’s expert on antisemitism fashion, Jess Cartner-Morely.

When it turned out that there was a video of Galliano, then working for Christian Dior, making similar pro-Hitler remarks at another bar on a separate occasion, the piece by Cartner-Morely was revised, and her suggestions that such charges were improbable erased.

Yesterday, a French court found Galliano guilty of antisemitic and racist behaviour, though he escaped possible fines and imprisonment. He was, however, ordered to pay a symbolic €1 in damages to his victims and pay the legal costs of the anti-racist organizations who were represented at his trial in June.

The Guardian’s initial report, it seems, says more about the Guardian than it says about their Francophile correspondent, and represents a disturbing pattern (which this blog is continually documenting) of minimizing, downplaying, or (often) downright ignoring expressions of explicit hatred towards Jews – particularly when such racism is expressed by groups they classify as victims. 

So, while they pounce at every opportunity to label groups like the EDL as racist, radical Islamist groups in the UK rarely are held to the same level of critical scrutiny, and indeed such proponents of a decidedly intolerant and illiberal brand of political Islam are often provided forums at CiF to espouse their views under the veneer of “progressive thought.  

The Guardian’s reporting clearly indicates an editorial line much more at ease condemning Islamophobia than antisemitism.

It’s almost as if, in the mind of the Guardian Left, fierce and unapologetic polemics against antisemites are no longer fashionable – as such narratives aren’t helpful in advancing their political agenda.

No, John Galliano is not in the same league as those who possess an ideologically inspired antisemitism, who we routinely report on, but their initial coverage of Galliano’s remarks does, it seems, suggest a disturbing journalistic tick – as it represents yet another example of the paper’s continuing antisemitic sins of omission.