NYJW on GG - Take 2

The Jewish Week put up another article on the Five Towns Kashrut controversy, and at least this time they don't make total hash out of it (as they did out of last week's article on the subject). This week's take is a heck of a lot more balanced than last week's - which basically quoted the Bolenders' side of the conflict without any recognition whatsoever given to the fact that there actually was another side to the story.

This well-researched "fact", from today's article, is so typical of the publication's curious style of "reporting" it makes me laugh:

Although some people appeared to have heeded the call of area rabbis not to shop at the store, others said they were deliberately flouting that directive, frustrated with the Vaad’s decision not to spell out their concerns with Gourmet Glatt.

That's all. No quotes from community members, no statements from shoppers who were found shopping in the store after the boycott was called, as we would see in any other news source worth the paper its printed on. Just the writer's murky asessment of the situation - which (if you want my opinion) seems to be based solely on the reporter's perusal of the blogs he goes on to mention next:

A number of Internet blogs, or online personal journals, on the controversy were critical of the Vaad, with one saying that though the Vaad must be supported and every eatery held to the same standards, the Vaad “is being somewhat vague — perhaps suspiciously vague — on the actual reasoning behind their decision. … They’re careening toward a vote of no confidence if they don’t start discussing why they did what they did.”

A "number"? Did you mean Still Wonderin's blog, Mr. Ain? Well, why not just say so?

And of course, an article in the Jewish Week wouldn't be complete without a misleading quote that frames the story all wrong:

Rabbi Harry Cohen, an administrator of a different kosher supervisory agency that is not connected to this dispute, said that although Rabbi Kravitz should have sought permission from the Vaad before agreeing to provide kosher supervision, he disagreed with the actions of the Vaad.

“Where do these rabbis come off forcing him to sell?” he asked.

"Forcing him to sell"? I think this oft-repeated misconception is one that must be cleared up. The Vaad is in so position to "force" Mr. Bolender to sell - as is seen in his choice (yes, his choice) to contract another Hechsher and maintain ownership of the store. The Vaad, fed up with various Kashrut violations, simply gave the owners of the store a choice: sell the store to an owner who we feel is trustworthy, or lose your hasgacha. Mr. Bolender obviously chose the latter (while breaking a contractual obligation or two along the way). Perhaps Gourmet Glatt's ownership felt that the Vaad forced their hand - but personally, I feel the Vaad's hand was forced by Gourmet Glatt.