A case of innocence by association?

Pretty much all I've ever known about Tommy Hilfiger is that his name shows up on shirts which I'd never wear. Then again, when a few years ago I was told (face to face, not via e-mail) that he was an anti-semite I had no reason to doubt my source. On the other hand, it wasn't information that was particularly useful to me. I couldn't boycott his products because I wouldn't wear them in the first place. So I've gone through the past few years with the information of Hilfiger's supposedly anti-semitic opinions stashed away somewhere in my memory, waiting for it to be needed.

But then I received an e-message telling me about Hilfiger's anti-semitic and racist comments on a television show (and encouraging me to boycott his products in protest), and my interest was aroused. All of the signs suggested a hoax. I received the information from someone who passes on everything without checking it, and if this was "new" information, why did it seem so much like the source of the rumor I'd heard a few years earlier. If this was the way Hilfiger was being described on the web and via e-mail, he was, to my mind, probably innocent.

Luckily, checking items such as this demand little more than a simple Google search. The results? I still don't wear his clothes, but Hilfiger is kosher.

Go to: Believe me when I tell you ...