Burqa comments crossed the line

Religion is important to the lives of many of our readers.

That’s according to the Torstar Journalistic Standards Guide, a comprehensive code of principles that governs how the Star operates.

This guidance came up during a controversy that erupted last week at the Star — one that caused pain for several Star journalists and some members of the public.

Vinay Menon, a veteran Star entertainment columnist, wrote a column urging Hollywood to fight for Iranian women. He was moved by the death last month of Mahsa Amini, 22, who died after being arrested by “morality police” in Iran, a special unit that enforces strict dress codes for women there.

According to reports, she wasn’t covering her head properly with her hijab before her arrest. The death sparked outrage and led to protests in Iran where women have burned their hijabs.

Menon argued “the least Hollywood can do is pay attention” and take up the cause of men and women who are risking physical harm, even death, to protest in Iran’s streets. He went on to say it was a “courageous and beautiful sight” seeing women in Iran setting their hijabs on fire.

Fair comment.

He mentioned strolling by “quite a few women” in the east end of Toronto who are dressed in “full-on burqas.” He wrote that this made him feel like a “passerby to subjugation.”

Then came a line that caused significant concern for several of his Star colleagues, many of them women and women of colour: “These women look like they are in Halloween costumes. I refuse to believe it is their choice,” he said, referring to women in burqas.

A female Star journalist sent me this reaction: “I am not sure mocking and assuming oppression based on a woman’s clothing choice can simply be witty writing or sardonic opinion under these circumstances.”

Mocking people who wear religious symbols is “extremely offensive and disappointing to see,” a male Star staffer wrote me.

The Star’s journalistic standards say: “Do not hold up one religion or set of beliefs as superior to another. Do not single out a religion or religious practice for ridicule or stereotyping.”

The column clearly violated these standards, even considering that Star columnists are, according to our guidelines, given a “wide latitude to express their own views.” That latitude, our policy says, is also subject to standards of taste.

The morning the column ran, senior Star managers met quickly to address the situation. As complaints came in, including on social media, Menon was contacted. After receiving his input the sentence about the Halloween costume was removed online, and an editor’s note was added saying the passage about the burqa was removed because it didn’t meet the Star’s editorial standards and that the Star regrets it was published in its original form.

Menon and I had a lengthy conversation about what he wrote. He said he didn’t set out to demean anyone, and apologized to anyone hurt or offended by the column and for the “internal grief” he caused some colleagues.

He said when he writes his column he uses “irony and hyperbolic language to make deeper points,” and with that comes the possibility of hurting or offending readers. (To be transparent, several readers had praise for Menon in the comments section under this column. Some journalists at the Star also had no problems with the column.)

Menon said he is neither racist nor Islamophobic.

“Would a racist or Islamophobe really write a column calling attention to Iranian women who are bravely fighting for their human rights? I stand with them,” he wrote me in an email.

Regarding the Halloween costumes remark, Menon said that when he “passes a woman in sweltering heat who is draped head-to-toe with only a slit to see through, yes I am reminded of the fundamental discomforts and identity-stealing nature of Halloween costumes.”

The senior editor who handled his column told me she had the same impression when she read the column and okayed it for publication.

I struggle a bit with Menon’s explanation. The gut test I use is replacing burqa, in relation to the Halloween reference, with any other religious attire — the turban, yarmulke, the Pope’s garments, for example.

That would be a clear violation of Star standards.

Jordan Himelfarb, a managing editor at the Star, said there were institutional failures at play here.

“The job of those who edit opinion is to preserve the columnist’s wide latitude to express his or her views, even when controversial or unpopular, while ensuring that what we publish is not libelous, inaccurate, hateful or beyond the bounds of good taste,” he said in a statement.

“Because of the tension between these principles, columns that touch on sensitive moral issues ought to be seen by multiple editors, including senior editors, thus ensuring that we have the necessary debates on whether a column crosses the line, that we make fully considered judgments and that the same standards are applied across the newsroom.

“In this case, that didn’t happen,” Himelfarb said.

The Star is taking steps to improve our opinion-editing process, including adding oversight of newsroom opinion to Himelfarb’s role and requiring that at least two editors view all columns on sensitive moral issues. The Star’s editorial board will remain independent.

“Our job — and it is among our most important — is to find the line, even when it’s disputed. We believe these changes will allow us to do that better and more consistently in the future,” he said.

I would add there’s another step that would be helpful: bringing in an outside expert on Islam who could talk to all of us at the Star and spark insightful dialogue on what is clearly a tricky topic.

Donovan Vincent is the Star’s Public Editor. Email: publiced@thestar.ca