The paper defended the article's general content in an editorial, but described its use of a picture of Ralph Miliband's grave as an "error of judgement".  In the editorial, the paper further remarked that "We do not maintain, like the jealous God of Deuteronomy, that the iniquity of the fathers should be visited on the sons. But when a son with prime ministerial ambitions swallows his father's teachings, as the younger Miliband appears to have done, the case is different. " A spokesman for the paper also described claims that the article continued its history of anti-Semitism as "absolutely spurious. " However, the reference to "the jealous God of Deuteronomy" was criticised by Jonathan Freedland, who said that "In the context of a piece about a foreign-born Jew, [the remark] felt like a subtle, if not subterranean hint to the reader, a reminder of the ineradicable alienness of this biblically vengeful people" and that "those ready to acquit the Mail because there was no bald, outright statement of antisemitism were probably using the wrong measure. "