• Benjamin Ovadya

    My grandfather also always demanded that we stand up and speak the truth. In that light, my grandparents, Meyer Joshua and Dorothy Nurenberger, founded the Canadian Jewish News NOT “over 40 years ago”, but rather 53 YEARS AGO.

  • truthdareisay

    I have enjoyed reading the Canadian Jewish News for over many decades. Actually to be precise since the 60’s. Why just last week, in one of the major Canadian newspapers, a journalist wrote about Mr. and Mrs. Nurenberger, the founders of the Canadian Jewish News. He wrote about how The Canadian Jewish News came about in 1960 and also thanks to the Nurenberger family memorabilia, there were also photos in that article. There is another vehicle for Jewish news and it is The Jewish Tribune. Competition was healthy, and both newspapers contribute a great deal to the Jewish community and beyond.

  • Henia Dankevy

    I agree, the CJN ought to and hopefully will be saved. A small, but important correction to your article is necessary – The CJN has been around and relevant for more than 50 years, not 40 as stated. We all remember reading the paper in the 60’s. Now that I have young grandchildren, I hope they have memories of the paper as well.

  • Sharona Beck

    As as granddaughter of MJ and Dorothy Nurenberger I am deeply offended by so many recent articles that are reporting that the CJN was founded 40 years ago. This is not only a lie to my family but a lie to the Jewish Community as a whole. My grandparents worked day and night to speak/write the truth and now they are being pushed out of Jewish history. The CJN should be embarrassed at the way they are attempting to change Jewish History in North America. The CJN was founded by my grandparents in the 1960’s and that’s the truth!

  • Allan Kagal

    I thought that the CJN was found by the Nurembergers 53 years ago.

  • Bernie M Farber

    With apologies to the Neuremberger family I meant absolutely no offence. Those of you who have so passionately made the needed correction, many thanks and in many ways it speaks even more urgently for the need to ensure its continuance.

    • AB

      Thank you, Bernie. I’m sure it was an honest mistake on your part.

  • Borukh

    Tthere is microfilm of CJN’s past issues, which will survive a VERY long time. For historians, critics of literature, sociologists, etc., “print is not dead” compared to electronic media, not by a long chalk! Who knows how long and how completely an electronic copy opf the CJN (if there is to be one) will survive? Will it include the histporically important ads? I doubt it. And please re-read Donald Carr’s statement. It is not, as I read it, certain that the publication will continue to exist electronically: “If The CJN is to be a vibrant part of the future, it will only be as an enhanced and expanded digital edition. That is our hope.”

    I think what is published in the CJN is very important historically – in all respects, including the ads! Microfilm preserves all of it and it is extremely well indexed and available in FULL TEXT electronically via at least one online indexing service, CBCA (Canadadian Business and Current Affairs), which even includes looking at it issue by issue – so for eg. any member of the Toronto Public Library (or other lpublic libraries in Canada or college and university libraries) can peruse
    the “what’s New” section issue by issue without even resorting to the microfilm (except for the ads). WIll that service continue to offer such access to a moribund publication? There is a danger that we will lose a great deal more than we may realize, khevre.

    The recent discussion in the pages of the CJN abouit whether the CIJA has been a worthy successor to the CJC is but one example of how the CJN has made an effort to open up controversial subjects to public debate. Frank Bialyustok had a full op-ed page on the killing of the CJC some time in 2011. Rabbi Erwin Schild’s full op-ed page in 2011 about the wasteful demolition of the old Bathurst JCC and the as yet awaited erection of a new building at a cost of many millions of dollars that might have been put to significantly better uses is another – and the ‘new’ building has been postponed yet again! Were ’embarassments’ such as these (I can think of many more) part of the reason the CJN was ‘killed’?

    In my view, the CJN has over the years significantly improved it’s reporting stories and its
    journalistic quality. This is very unlike the other Jewish weekly that is published in Toronto. The CJN also has seriously striven to represent fairly all aspects of the Jewish community in terms of its religious and political views. In some situations it actually broke stories that some in
    the community would have preferred stay out of the public eye, especially non-Jewish public eyes. These reflections of quality journalism were derided by many, and to its credit the CJN published their points of view as well.

    Refer to the comment on the blog at the end of the ist online announcement on the CJN’s Web site made by Bernie Bellan, publisher of The Jewish Post & News (Winnipeg): “Surely there must be some alternatives to an outright closure: Cut back to a bi-weekly; find an alternative method of delivery other than Canada Post; cut printing costs through tough negotiations with your printer;
    reduce hired staff and make better use of contract employees instead. We did all these things in Winnipeg and are nicely profitable. What a great loss it will be, not only to Torontonians, but Canadian Jews as a whole” (my emphasis). http://www.cjnews.com/node/105918

    And I also take note of what some bloggers there have said about the situation in the UK with a smaller Jewish population than we have here in Canada (365,000 vs. 265,000) – yet they publish an estimed natrional Jewish weekly (The Chronical, since 1841) plus 2 quarterly magazines or jouirnals! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_population_by_country).

    In 2006, the CJN hired Rotenberg Research to undertake a survey (July, 2006) of their
    readership. Several important aspects of which were found – see http://www.cjnews.com/CJNMEDIAKIT/demographics.html. Can so much have changed in less than seven years?

    Other papers we have in Canada are, to put it bluntly, small or very marginal
    to the Canadian Jewish community as a whole, and the only other national paper is ()to put it even more bluntly) a non-starter in terms of journalistic qualities, and broad pov reflecting the whole community. We do not all think the same way. Considering the quality of the online The Tablet one could argue that the CJN
    has not adjusted to the modern demographic facts. However, that’s a
    different and a ‘fixable’ matter from simply dumping the CJN entirely, or “hop[ing]… to be a vibrant part of the future”, per Mr. Carr.

    I think that the this decision shows a very restricted consideration of alternatives by the CJN’s Board of Directors. I trhink it was presumptive and premature, made with but very little input from the community. The massive and negative response to it from almost everyone who wrote in reflects that. I hope the decision is reversed and that the CJN continues to publish in print and in a revamped digital format.

  • Karen Shenfeld

    I called the paper yesterday and said I wanted to subscribe. The receptionist told me that I should “Call back tomorrow.” I was busy today, but I will call this week. I’m looking for the latest news. I really hope that something will be done to save the paper!!!