Talk:Avi Lewis

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Avi Lewis's interview of Ayaan Hirsi Ali[edit]

Hirsi lied about a lot of things just to get asylum in Holland, and when the Dutch immigration found out about it, they revoked her citizenship. It seems some of her fans here do not know about it. So how a lier can be a trusted "scholar"? The other issue is a good interview should be challenging and the interviewer should play the role of "devil's advocate"; a concept seemingly unfamiliar for the American audience.

Not true. Hirsi Ali is still a dutch citizen. It would be ironic if it were true. Amsterdam is crawling with immigrants who will stab you for your wallet and steal bicycles for a living. It amazes me how "liberals" like Avi are immediately to the right of the British BNP, or Vlaams Belang, when their boiler-plate thinking is challenged by someone genuine like Hirsi Ali. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.31.44.230 (talk) 00:01, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Let's not leave Avi Lewis' infamous CBC TV interview out of this article. It is being analyzed by Dennis Prager on his nationally broadcast radio program. You can listen to the first part of the analysis here: http://www.townhall.com/talkradio/Show.aspx?RadioShowID=3&ContentGuid=6854b05d-05d6-42a0-b981-fd1b20e4a60f

Avi Lewis has been invited to be interviewed by Dennis Prager to further understanding of the interview Avi Lewis had with Ayaan Hirsi Ali. 74.103.60.55 05:38, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not relevant. It was one interview that was hardly any more, or less, controversial than any of his other interviews. It certainly does not warrant mention in this article. Ayaan Hirsi Ali is rather a minor figure compared to many other people he has interviewed over the years. If you think that particular interview does warrant mention on Wikipedia, put it in the Ayaan Hirsi Ali article where it will have relevance.--74.121.254.2 14:16, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong! It does have relevance here, because it was the first time that Lewis's name was given prominence in the USA. It also demonstrated a severe level of patronizing, racist and sexist intolerance, which should be noted for Lewis, in the same way that it should be noted for any right-wing figure. Unlike the claim in the deletion of the relevant information, the facts as entered were not POV nor could they be challenged, as they were a direct transcript of his interview. unsigned message from 207.216.180.197 11:56, 16, August 2007

It has no relevance, as stated by the previous poster. It is a minor interview, one of hundreds he had done over the years. Using such highly charged words as 'racist' and 'sexist' would indeed be POV and reason enough to preclude it from the article. It is also untrue this interview gave him much prominance in the USA. In popular culture, his interview with Lou Reed, done in the mid 1990s, brought him to some prominance, as it is considered one of the best that Reed ever gave to any interviewer. If you want mention of this interview, put in the Ayaan Hirsi Ali article, like the previous poster mentioned.--Abebenjoe 16:07, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Identified by Time Magazine in 2005 as one of the world's 100 most influential people, Ayaan Hirsi Ali is several orders of magnitude more significant to world events than is Lou Reed or Avi Lewis. Lewis' interview was not significant to her, but in showing his prejudices and intolerance, it was to Avi Lewis. To not include this interview is the same as suggesting Cindy Sheehan's anti-George Bush remarks should be mentioned only in the article on George Bush, not that of Cindy Sheehan. In both cases that would be nonsense. Note that the words "racist" and "sexist" are only an external characterization of his interview, but facts that would lead the casual observer to those conclusions are worthy of note. Only verifiable facts are appropriate for the article. --207.216.180.197 20:30, 16 August 2007

Still not revelvant. She's hardly the most famous person he has interviewed, and unless all his major interviews are listed in the article, she simply does not merit inclusion in the article. Lou Reed, by the way, is far better known than she is, even if Time picked her as someone of significance. As stated before, if you really think this is important, and it looks like you do think so, put it in her article. Otherwise, it is out of place in this article.--Abebenjoe 15:52, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This Ayaan Hirsi Ali thing just won't go away for Avi Lewis. Jonathan Kay at the National Post on October 2nd, 2007 calls Lewis' performance an "over-the-top example of left-wing bias at the CBC" (http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/issuesideas/story.html?id=ac944770-6eaf-4264-93aa-358e5031f12c&p=1). It appears to have expanded Lewis' reputation by an order of magnitude, in a negative sort of way. A search on YouTube for Avi Lewis videos vs. those for Ayaan Hirsi Ali shows his interview of her getting almost an order of magnitude more hits than any other video of his posted, and two orders of magnitude more than most of his work (that's 100 to 1). So his interview with her was significant to him. If his interview with Lou Reed was of even greater significance, then it should be posted for the benefit of all. It would also allow the competitive marketplace to establish which was Lewis' most significant interview. 207.81.127.76 04:17, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In the marketplace, Lou Reed has sold a lot more records and videos than Ayaan Hirsi Ali, and garnered more press.--Abebenjoe 07:22, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Abbebenjoe, it appears you do not understand what is meant by the "competitive marketplace". Regardless, rather than being a dispassionate Wiki editor, the suspicion is that you are a confidant of Avi Lewis, or perhaps Avi Lewis himself, and wish to portray a certain image of him in this article, rather than a more factually-based image, such as would be appropriate in Wikipedia to properly understand the individual. So my question is, are you personally acquainted with Avi Lewis? If so, what is your relationship to him? 207.81.127.76 22:55, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Number 2 asks, "Information...Information". Number 6's reply, "That would be telling!" "Be seeing you."--Abebenjoe 06:50, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How interesting. Of course the interview with Ali is critical to Avi Lewis's reputation. It is an internet classic that will be sighted for years.

The bio, as written, obscures the fact that Avi Lewis apparently has not attended college (both the schools listed, despite their names are high schools, not universities).

Thus it is especially noteworthy the condensation that he displays with his interview of Ali, where he asks, basically, if she is a trained puppet. In fact Ms. Ali has a masters degree in political science from one of the top Universities in Holland.

Yes, there is someone spewing talking points with no real education or deep thought to back them up in this interview, but it isn't the guest, it is the host.

I'm sure leftists will continue to 'excise' any mention of this shatteringly telling interview in the same way that the Islamists excise their little girls. Both are afraid of what a thoughtful liberated empowered woman can do to their wrong-headed world views. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.32.248.109 (talk) 17:03, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just would like to add that Avi Lewis has been known to have strong left-leaning political views and will argue against the current administration at the drop of a hat. But criticizing the American government hardly makes a person anti-American. In a highly politicized country such as Canada, criticizing ones government is a sport, just like hockey and this does not make Canadians anti-Canadian either. And politics in the US is a sports for the rich, his argument was correct. Just what is the total budget spent so far by all the candidates running for the primaries? I think it exceeds the billions. Not even running for election yet. --Dave1973 19:40, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I cleaned up the section to make it seem more objective and npov. It should not call him outright "anti-American", without challenging the claim or using less matter-of-fact language. My logic was to have it say that "some critics" (I added a link to a critical blog post) label him that. since obviously not everyone agrees. Regardless of left, right, offensive, or not, the section sounded a little biased. Jcrav2k6 22:47, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think the right-wingers attempt to damage the Avi Lewis page is really pathetic. First of all, he did nothing "racist" or "sexist" in the interview. I challenge anyone here to present a quote from the interview that proves these claims. Secondly he was never "infamous" for being anti-American since infamous implies that he is well known, which he is not in the US where these claims were made for about a week. The only reason right-wingers are angry about the interview is because he made Hirsi Ali look very very bad. She could not stop spewing talking points and he exposed that. Within the myriad of ludicrous things Hirsi Ali said are things like "The US is the best democracy in the world" or "There is no such thing as Islamophobia". When Lewis responded to this statement with "Is there such a thing as antisemitism?" She responded "Yes but Islam is not a race", obviously making the ludicrous statement that Judaism is a race. As I've said, the only reason the right-wingers are pissed is because he totally exposed her. He was most heavily criticized for not being too "respectful" towards her (which really means questioning her views which right wingers always try to bash on the basis that she is a victem of Islamic extremism [which is true]).

An even more pathetic argument here is that the Hirsi Ali interview should be highlighted, put in bold, and perhaps replace all else , because she is "Identified by Time Magazine in 2005 as one of the world's 100 most influential people" and "several orders of magnitude more significant to world events than is Lou Reed or Avi Lewis." What an arbitrary standard of measurement. You do realize that time magazine's most influencial person of 2006 was "YOU" right. According to your standards, "YOU" are more influencial than Ayaan Hirsi Ali. The poster here should also note that Avi Lewis' wife and co-worker on "The Take" Naomi Klein is eleventh on Prospect magazine's list of top 100 most global public intellectuals (which was determined by votes and not by an arbitrary standard like TIME magazine's staff). Hirsi Ali came in 46th, really putting things in perspective. So whatever importance here is given to the interview where Hirsi Ali supporters keep whining about, much more space should be given to Avi Lewis and Noami Klein's documentary "The Take".

Lastly, I added the adjective "neoconservative" to Hirsi Ali in this article since that was the position that Avi Lewis attacked, and not her feminism. Since neoconservative these days is defined by association to the American Enterprise Institute to which Hirsi Ali is a member, I think it is more than appropriate. 99.232.3.235 (talk) 18:32, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Adding the adjective "neoconservative" is just silly. I saw the interview in question. Saying that "American democracy is best" or not believing in "islamophobia" hardly makes one a neoconservative. Why don't you add some shallow epithets to the Ayaan Hirsi Ali article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.24.18.59 (talk) 04:05, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say calling her at least "conservative" is acceptable, though neoconservative may be applicable as well since she is a fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. However, I am going to restore my link to a critical blog post, since someone removed it. Why was it removed? It helps give people more insight into the argument and remains NPOV. Also, I removed "Hirsi Ali's supporters", since you need not be a supporter of her to be offended since his comment could be construed as offending Americans in general (not that I don't sympathize with Avi over Ali but this should be as unbiased as possible). It was fine the way I had it. Jcrav2k6 (talk) 22:29, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia: NPOV. We should keep this article so that it represents not only your opinions but to keep a sense of balance. You can keep what the other side has, and counter it with cited criticism from your point of view and the article will have balance. We can have it so that both arguments are equally represented, or in the least that the article remain neutral. Words like "vehement" and "very outright" have no place in this article, unless it's in a quote from someone, as is stated in the rules. Having a range of opinions is what makes Wikipedia so good. It's that, or we're just going to have a constant cycle of futile editing and undoing as we do now, it seems. Jcrav2k6 (talk) 03:15, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Summary – those who see Ali as a messenger of truth see the Ali-Avi interview as something worth noting and those who see Ali as a kook see it as a non-issue which some have decided to turn into one (possibly due to a general dislike of Avi’s family). Usually, if only the fans of the person interviewed see it worth noting you don’t include it or there would be comments concerning everyone a specific host has ever interviewed. However, to be fair to both sides (and to decide where the information goes) let’s try to answer the two important questions: What did his interview with Ali reveal about Avi? What did her interview with Avi reveal about Ali? Avi and Ali could not have grown up in more different families: Avi’s parents are both Jewish, staunch feminists, and, politically social democrat, and expected their children to participate in conversations at the kitchen table where the issues of the day were debated and discussed. Avi married his wife, the daughter of two Americans, despite his parents hesitation over the match. Though Avi is intelligent, articulate, well read, he does seem, very much a product of his upbringing (the superficical comparisons between Michele Landsberg and Naomi Klein are striking).

Ali’s parents are both Muslim, believed in traditional gender rolls, politically conservative (as Avi infers), expected unquestioned compliance in their children, and, according to Ali’s own testimony, did not respect her opinions and wishes. She left, not to get away from her parents (the option of staying with her parents was no longer open to her), but to avoid marrying someone she did not wish to. Does Ali’s “feminism” extend beyond her legitimate aversion to female genital mutilation (an experience she found very traumatic) and forced marriage – or is it limited to these issues?

More importantly, did Ali reject all aspects of her upbringing or were her involvement in right-winged political groups an attempt to recreate the family life she had before her parents decided she was old enough to pass off to someone else. Before her latest reincarnation, Ali, an immigrant herself, became involved in a party who exploited anti immigrant sentiment and then turned against her (as did her parents before them). Now Ali is involved in another right-winged movement with another set of ideologues or “parents” to please. Ali’s tendency to spout slogans adds to the impression that her purpose is more to mimic the beliefs of those she wishes to impress than anything else.

While Avi sees a similarity between the denial of Islamophobia and the denial of the Holocaust, Ali doesn’t see any similarity between the two because Ali sees (or seems to see) Islam, in all its shapes and forms as inheriantly bad. Avi has a history of being critical of slogans and cliche’s in general – not just “America cliches” - because he prefers to look at all the innuances of an issue (any issue) rather than give it a superficial surface cliche-like treatment – not that he is always successful in this regard.

The Ali interview followed Avi’s interaction with the Moshe Ronan, whose views Avi found extremely offensive because they represented a double standard in victimization, represents the only time Avi ever lost his temper, even momentarily, at a guest. Avi said that Ronan was the first to invoke the name of Mandela when he was invoked earlier by Rafeef Ziadeh - which was a small thing but showed his state of mind (both Avi and Moshe recovered their decorum after the commercial).

Avi does have a habit of pointing out when a person’s arguments are weak (often making points for both sides of an issue) – which is one thing his fans like about him. Avi’s father, Stephen Lewis, who stated that a belief in human rights trumps all other beliefs (even religious ones), grudgingly states that Israel’s treatment of Palistinians is wrong. In contrast, Avi is less grudging is his belief that Israel is guilty of human rights abuses. Does this make Avi less religious than his father or is there some other facter in play?

In conclusion, the Ali interview may possibily be relevant to the Avi wikipedia entry if one looks at it in the context of Hebrewism and Islamophobia. Otherwise, it seems to be more telling of Ali’s persona than Avi’s. Ali lying on her immigration form doesn’t automatically disqualify her opinions (if they are her opinions). Dennis Prager attacks a lot of people, but does his name need to be included in the Wikipedia entry of everyone he has ever talked about? If not, what makes Avi special?

Moshe Ronan on Hot House (video) http://www.cbc.ca/bigpicture/house.html Stephen Lewis on Israel http://www.cbc.ca/thehour/video.php?id=1735 Stephen Lewis on raising Avi (transcript) http://www.boloji.com/wfs5/wfs744.htm


Reword this or leave it out[edit]

PHRASE REMOVED: Lewis is somewhat infamous for a June 11, 2007 interview, he held with feminist political writer Ayaan Hirsi Ali. During thecontroversial interview he was very outright about his vehement Anti-Americanism|anti-American views.[1]

Let's leave out the words "infamous" and "controversial" because you are giving your opinion when you do that.

Let's leave the word "feminist" out of it since almost everyone in the Avi Lewis entry considers themselves a feminist - and it will look quite messy if we put "feminist" beside everyone's name.

Also, Ali is more of a racist than a feminist any way - and I am being very generous not putting the word "hate mongerer" or "racist" beside her name because she is promoting, at the very minimum, cultural genocide if not justifying violence against a definable group of people. Unlike Avi, Ali doesn't believe in equal pay for work of equal value, affordable child care, or gun control - all important feminist issues.

You can put it back in, but word it so that a person can make up their own mind about the interview and right-wing reaction to it rather than telling them how they should be interpreting it. 02:57, 30 March 2008 (UTC)24.77.37.48 (talk) 02:57, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. Hirsi Ali believes in freedom for millions of women oppressed by men who suffocate them beneath the burkha of Islamic shariah, and have done so for centuries. No 'feminist' would ever go for that, what in the midst of the current crisis in affordable child care! Everyone would agree that her philosophy is a 'racist' notion, because it hurts the feelings of people of the 'race' of ... people who are members of the 'race' of ... well anyway I'm pretty sure it is 'racist'. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.214.6.204 (talk) 06:43, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Avi believes that one can be both a feminist and Muslim whereas Hirsi doesn't. The Canadian Muslim Union believes that neither the state or the family (ie father, husband) have a right to tell a woman how to dress. They see the niqab as sexist, but telling a woman not to wear it as an even more sexist act. Stephen Lewis (Avi's dad) believes that women's rights will help fight both AIDS and poverty in Africa - he believes in male circumcism but not female circumcism. ```` —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.77.84.145 (talk) 23:33, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bbmnEcbPVmw

AlJazeera[edit]

So he's on the Al Jazeera now eh? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jammoe (talk • contribs) 16:52, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I know, Avi Lewis has never been on Aljazeera - though it seems that many of the journalists on Aljazeera have gotten their start on the bbc. Hey, you are right! Thanks! BTW - before anyone adds this to the page, is Avi hosting the show or did they just pick up this special on New Orleans?

Frontline USA - Politics of Race - 22 Feb 08 - (New Orleans) Pt 1 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gHK-qgIEr-g Pt 2 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yz3KPeSZCsY —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.77.37.48 (talk) 09:02, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]


AVI LEWIS MISSING VIDEO[edit]

A few days ago, Avi's On The Map and Big Picture stuff was still up on line at the CBC and today it is all gone. We may have to find his stuff elsewhere and take a look at the links already up. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.77.37.48 (talk) 08:26, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong Birthdate[edit]

He was born in 1964 or 1965, not 1968. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.243.24.233 (talk) 06:22, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 7 external links on Avi Lewis. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 01:16, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 4 external links on Avi Lewis. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 23:49, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Avi Lewis. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 21:12, 20 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Avi_Lewis&oldid=1201134780"