Yesterday I wrote about L’Oréals hair model Amena Khan, who wore a hijab and was therefore a role model and a brave woman and a hero—even though perhaps not a good advertiser for hair products, since you can’t see her hair. But of course many women, even those forced to veil in public, take off their hijabs at home, and would therefore be prospective customers for L’Oréal.
Sadly, it turned out that Khan had a Twitter history of not only criticizing Israel, but also calling for the elimination of the state, a stand I consider close to anti-Semitism. After all, Israel was established by the United Nations, and calling for its elimination doesn’t make sense unless you want to disenfranchise the world’s only Jewish state (are people calling for elimination of North Korea, or of Myanmar because of its abysmal treatment of Rohingyas?).
Regardless, on HuffPo’s original article I added a comment that their report needed a correction since Khan had resigned from L’Oreal’s campaign, and L’Oréal issued a statement saying, in effect, they weren’t sorry to see her go. HuffPo, of course, never corrects or updates a story, so that piece is still there sans correction (my comment is also there, though).
Well, now HuffPo has issued an update reflecting Khan’s parting of ways from L’Oréal (I suspect she was fired or asked to step down, but we don’t know for sure). Click on the screenshot below to see their ridiculous new piece:
The article then reproduces Khan’s “apology” but, of course, does not reproduce her tweets, or even mention what they said, save this:
Khan issued an apology Monday on Instagram concerning a series of her tweets from 2014 ― although she didn’t identify which tweets. But after the original L’Oréal announcement, people had quickly bashed certain critical remarks she made about Israel, which have since been deleted.
They of course blame L’Oréal for ditching Khan, even though Khan herself said she stepped down from the campaign. Since we don’t know what happened, it’s ridiculous to imply, as the article does, that this is L’Oréal’s fault. Even if she was fired, it’s not the company’s fault: it’s the fault of Khan for issuing hateful and anti-Semitic tweets (see my original post where I reproduce them). They also call out L’Oréal for this:
This is not the first time L’Oréal has hired and then almost immediately parted ways with a diverse model over previous social media posts. Five months ago, the company cut ties with Monroe Bergdorf, its first transgender model, over her remarks about white America’s systemic racism.
How can a model be “diverse”? And Bergdorf didn’t just remark about “white America’s systemic racism”; she said on Facebook that all white people are racists. That itself is a racist comment. In fact, Bergdorf herself took down those posts. If there was nothing wrong with them, why did she remove them?
At any rate, the whole tenor of the new HuffPo piece is to blame L’Oréal for reducing diversity and supposedly ditching Khan (I suppose they’d say that L’Oréal should have begged Khan to stay). But it’s not good business, or even very conciliatory, to say that all white people are racists and that Israel should be wiped off the map (as Khan did). By supporting Khan, and neglecting to reproduce her tweets or even report what she said, HuffPo is implicitly supporting Khan’s anti-Israel narrative.
They even reproduce five tweets (all apparently from Sikhs or Muslims) “coming to Khan’s defense.” (Of course they post NO tweets criticizing Khan!) Here’s one of them:
A British Muslim woman has been hounded out from an ad campaign for being critical of Israel. So criticising countries is racist now?
Where are those defenders of free speech now? 🙄https://t.co/7Vglcb7nDs
— Sunny Hundal (@sunny_hundal) January 22, 2018
Well, Khan didn’t just criticize Israel, but said it was an “illegal state” and that “it was only a matter of time” before it was defeated. And if it’s not racist to criticize countries, why was the Left (and HuffPo) up in arms when Trump reportedly criticized Haiti and some unspecified African nations as “shithole countries”. THAT was deemed racist, and I think it was! In fact, HuffPo itself said that Trump’s comments were racist.
As for advertising models to be allowed to say what they want and still be in ad campaigns, well, Hundal doesn’t understand where free speech applies. Would Sunny Hundal have defended Khan’s “free speech” if she said something in favor of Nazis? I doubt it. Khan is free to say what she wants in America, but L’Oréal doesn’t owe her a job no matter what kind of hatred she spews.
What happened here—and this is emblematic of the Regressive Left—is that the hatred espoused and then hidden by Khan (similar to Linda Sarsour’s support of convicted murderers and terrorists) didn’t suit their “victimhood narrative”, so they try to twist this incident into reflecting L’Oréal’s “racism” instead of Khan’s own anti-Semitism, which is swept under the rug. Apparently, to HuffPo, Evil Israel had it coming.
I’ve about had it with HuffPo. The reason I criticize it (to some readers’ dismay) is that it is one of the U.S.’s most widely read left-wing “news” site, and its flaws exactly mirror the flaws of the Regressive Left. Its treatment of Amena Khan is a prime example. HuffPo is the Breitbart of the Left.