The Guardian’s Editorial Code may not include any prohibition against licensing voices who are openly anti-Semitic, providing a platform to members of a terrorist group, nor legitimizing those who seek the Jewish state’s destruction, but does include the following:
“In general, we do not publish someone’s race or ethnic background or religion unless that information is pertinent to the story. We do not report of the race of criminal suspects unless their ethnic background is part of a description that seeks to identify them or is an important part of the story (for example, if the crime was a hate crime”
Yet, in a 1800 word Guardian report on the London riots, by Paul Lewis, titled, “Tottenham riots: a peaceful protest, then suddenly all hell broke loose, Aug. 8, which doesn’t mention the race, ethnicity, or religion of the rioters, somehow found it pertinent to note that some of those who gathered to jeer police were, allegedly, Hasidic Jews.
“The make-up of the rioters was racially mixed. Most were men or boys, some apparently as young as 10….But families and other local residents, including some from Tottenham’s Hasidic Jewish community, also gathered to watch and jeer at police. [emphasis mine]
So, the rioters – who have torched, ransacked and looted shops, pubs, banks and even residential properties, and have attacked journalists, police, and firefighters for the past three days – are characterized by Lewis as merely “racially mixed”, yet he somehow deems it relevant to note that some of Tottenham’s Hasidic Jewish community were among those who allegedly watched and “jeered” police.
To the Guardian, the particular race, ethnicity, or religious affiliation of the rioters is of no particular significance, but the religion of a few of those who reportedly witnessed the police response to the riots is apparently worth noting.
What possible relevance, per the Guardian’s own code of ethics, does the religious background of some of those who reportedly jeered police have?
Why wasn’t the race, ethnicity, or religious background of others who witnessed the riots and/or jeered police mentioned?
Is there really any question that Lewis’s report represents a flagrant violation of the Guardian’s Editorial Code?
- The “I don’t hate Jews, only Zionists” Chronicles continue at CiF: The vile logic of Slavoj Žižek (cifwatch.com)
- The Guardian’s bias in covering Sheikh Raed Salah (cifwatch.com)
- Mondoweiss or David Duke? Raed Salah’s defenders reach a new low. (cifwatch.com)
- On CiF Watch and the fight against contemporary anti-Semitism (cifwatch.com)
- Update on Guardian partner, The Arabist: On “Jewish Money” (cifwatch.com)
- Lush: “We aren’t anti-Semitic”. (cifwatch.com)
- CiF reader comments critical of the Guardian vanish without a trace. (cifwatch.com)
Categories: Category not assigned