I mean, you can take the cynical route and say that taking up the jewish link angle is going to catch the eye, get more hits, sell more papers or you could take the more forgiving route and just say probably 98% of Marca’s readers won’t have a clue about this history of Tottenham’s, will have no clue about any jewish links to Tottenham and much else other than that it’s a club from London (if that) who Gareth Bale used to play for, and that it’s interesting to talk about football history or a currently relevant club in the context of its long history.
Personally, in either case I don’t see the issue. Newspapers are a business and Marca does FAR, FAR more cynical things than inform your run of the mill spanish football fan about the history of Tottenham while highlighting a history of good quality of football and generally taking a very positive angle toward the club. So do the English equivalents. I don’t really want to go here because in the other recent conversation in the ‘grind your gears’ thread I was partly trolling and trying to provoke people and in this one I’m 100% serious, but I really think this is a case of a) foreign paper (from a country with a very catholic history) using the word jewish and ‘hated’ in a headline + b) people actively looking for things to be offended about on twitter/things that give them a platform to look righteous and sensitive and socially aware and considerate = SHOCK AND AWE
No, certainly not currently. But 60-70 years ago–being conservative here, probably before–surely. Now any hate is probably more like racism or anti-semitism in the U.S., not out in the open whatsoever but that doesn’t mean it’s not there.
Literally: hated. But hated in english sounds a lot stronger than ‘odiado’ in this context in spanish. If I had more time when I was putting that quote above which I stumbled upon when reading an article on ESPN about this, I would’ve qualified that it’s more of a misinterpretation than a mistranslation. Which is actually what Enrique Ortego said in his rectification-- interpretación errónea, which literally means misinterpretation.
Which is literally the case (no idea why ESPNFC decided to translate it to mistranslation, when there is also an English version of the article I see now: http://www.marca.com/en/football/international-football/opinion/2017/10/16/59e4c1d222601d2b578b4649.html , in which it’s translated as mistaken interperation…maybe this version wasn’t available when ESPNFC made the article).
In short, I’m a translator so I’m getting all nerdy about this-- the bottom line is that it’s a typical case of denotation vs. connotation. The denotation is exactly the same. The connotation is not. If I were translating that headline, to preserve the connotative meaning, I would probably go for disliked, as we use the word hated probably a bit more flippantly, as spanish is in general a bit more direct language in its use, and we are not as (haven’t regressed so much? ) advanced in the arts of over-politeness and roundabout language.
Either way…Enrique Ortego or whoever decided to write that rectification for him decided to put emphasis on interpretation of the word ‘odiado’ to explain to the international/english speaking public why it might offend, which makes sense, but I would just say in general it’s a cultural thing, I can’t imagine any spaniard, even an incredibly snowflakish jewish one, reading that headline and thinking twice.
As you say, though: they are saying that’s a reason/contributing factor to why (historically) there has been ill-will toward them as a club. And my conclusion is the same: there’s nothing wrong with that assertion, it’s factually correct.