Following communication with UK Media Watch, editors at the Evening Standard revised the headline and text to make it clear that the incident on Israel’s northern border last week was started by an Iranian drone that penetrated Israeli air space.
In initial reports on Sunday and Monday, following hostilities on Saturday between Israel and Syria, the Iranian drone (which violated Israeli air space and caused the incident) wasn’t included in the headline and only appeared further in the article. However, a recent report in the Independent went a step further, omitting the drone altogether in both the headline and the text.
The Guardian simply has no credibility on the issue of anti-Jewish racism, and we seriously doubt that the editor responsible for the piece condemning attacks on Soros was motivated by a genuine anger towards antisemitic expressions. As Guardian journalist Michael White tweeted, on an unrelated controversy, “we all cherry pick our outrage sometimes”.
Guest post by Akus We have become used to the media misreporting events from Israel. However, the reports that followed the recent destruction of an Iranian drone that entered Israeli airspace were […]
A Feb. 11th report in the Independent, by Daniel Khalili-Tari, managed to get a crucial detail wrong, claiming that an Iranian drone was shot down over Syria, despite prior reports at the same publication making it clear that the drone was shot down after it crossed the northern border into Israel.
The decision by The Economist to leave the false impression that a leading Holocaust historian evoked such a comparison does not reflect well on the seriousness of editors in upholding their own editorial standards, which includes a pledge to “consider whether the context and presentation of the facts are fair”.
Foreign journalists covering the region are so careful not to amplify or accept at face value the “hasbara” disseminated by the Israeli government or pro-Israel groups, yet seem perfectly willing to report (as real news) such staged protests and other forms of political street theatre.
Economist falsely suggests Israeli historian compared African detention centers to “concentration camps”.
We contacted Holocaust historian Yehuda Bauer by email, to ask him if, as The Economist claimed, he’s used the term “modern concentration camps”, to characterize the detention of African migrants. Bauer promptly replied to our email and flatly denied ever using any version of the term.
The suggestion in the EU report that the Jewish “narrative” is being promoted “at the expense of other religions” represents the opposite of the truth, as Israel continues to safeguard Muslim holy sites in Jerusalem, whilst Palestinian leaders continually deny Jewish history in the holy city and incite their people to view any Jewish presence on Judaism’s holiest site as an intrusion onto an exclusively ‘Muslim’ site.
Despite the fact that Burke acknowledges that “the emergence of terrorism as we know it today” begun “in the second half of the 19th century”, his historical overview of modern terror somehow manages to avoid any mention of Palestinian attacks against Jews in Israeli cities, or Palestinian attacks on Jewish targets in Western cities.
“Despite being engaged in nearly perpetual conflict with Palestinians over the division of land, Israel has developed into an economic hub in the 69 years of its existence. The densely populated country has focused on growing its high-tech industry, a change from its agricultural roots. Israel has one of the fastest growing GDPs of the 25 richest countries, increasing 4% in 2016.”
Netanyahu’s trip to India reveals two sides of Israel that do not receive enough media attention – Israel as a partner in solving the major humanitarian issues of the day, and Israel as a country that is quite popular in many parts of the world – facts which contradict the simplistic, one-sided narrative often presented by foreign journalists covering the region.
Indy’s former Jerusalem reporter: Gaza tunnels are a testament to Palestinian “hard work and ingenuity”
Macintyre, the Indy’s former Jerusalem correspondent, said that Hamas were “a relatively pragmatic Islamist regime”, suggested Gazans are free to criticise the regime, and that the terror group’s building of tunnels was “testament to their hard work and ingenuity”.
Whilst Fisk’s criticism of Ross’s AIPAC connections is legitimate (as are questions about Jared Kushner’s Israeli financial and business ties), questioning the loyalty of Ross and the other Jewish peace negotiators – suggesting they can’t be trusted to negotiate fairly with the Palestinians because of their faith – crosses the line.
There are good humanitarian-based arguments for maintaining current UNRWA funding until a long-term solution can be found, but there can be no serious argument to maintain the fiction that there are over 5 million actual Palestinian refugees and that these non-refugees of Palestinian descent should be “repatriated” to a place they never once stepped foot.
It is entirely logical for Israel to not allow BDS activists into the country. It is not because they are documenting human rights violations – human rights organisations work freely in Israel. It is because they have made the choice to join a movement whose stated aim is to harm Israel. Why do such people have the right to enter the country they seek to harm?
There seems to be no limit to the lengths the Guardian will go to ignore, obfuscate or excuse Palestinian extremism, incitement or historical revisionism. Their former Middle East Editor, Ian Black, provided his take on Mahmoud Abbas’s recent speech in Ramallah and characteristically airbrushed the most indefensible parts in order to maintain the narrative of a ‘moderate’, even “principled” Palestinian President.
An op-ed in The Guardian by radical anti-Israel activist, and Code Pink co-founder, Medea Benjamin, included the outrageous claim that Ahed Tamimi, the Palestinian teen who was captured on video assaulting an Israeli soldier, was a “PEACEFUL human rights activist”.
Following communication with UK Media Watch, the Guardian agreed to amend the sentence and remove the word “peaceful”.
The low lights of a diatribe against the world in Ramallah last night by the Palestinian “president”, who today celebrated the 12th year of a 4 year term, included his characterisation of Israel as a European “colonialist project, which has nothing to do with the Jews”. Thus far, among UK media outlets, only The Telegraph covered Abbas’s speech. However, their article ignored his antisemitic smear.
Following communication between UKMW and the Guardian, their editors also agreed to change their caption beneath the photo, used to illustrate a recent article (Israel imposes travel ban on 20 foreign NGOs over boycott movement, Jan. 7th), to reflect the more accurate translation of the Arabic sign.
Contrary to what Rehman and countless other Guardian contributors and journalist have alleged, BDS is not a ‘progressive’ civil rights movement, but represents quite the opposite: a regressive campaign by radical activists, all of whom share an unhealthy fixation on the ‘sins’ committed by a historically oppressed minority, and some of whom openly seek to turn back the clock on Jewish civil rights by denying Jews, and only Jews, the right to self-determination and freedom
In addition to the incendiary, hateful, anti-historial and intellectually unserious nature of the charge that Israeli “atrocities” against Palestinians are anywhere in the same moral universe as Nazi atrocities against the Jews, such comparisons of are defined as a form of antisemitism by the EU Parliament and the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance, of which Ireland is a member.
Though we’re of course accustomed to errors, distortions and omissions in Guardian op-eds about Israel, this piece by the Orthodox Patriarch, suggesting some sort of sinister Jewish plot to ethnically cleans Christians from the holy land, rises to a whole other level of dishonesty.
An Independent article on the death of a Palestinian man on the Gaza border, during clashes with Israeli soldiers last month, included a passage suggesting that his death evokes Israel’s “killing”, in 2000, of a 12 year old Palestinian boy named Mohammed Al Durah. However, the article erroneously suggested that Israel’s responsibility for the young boy’s death was an indisputable fact.
Within the media echo chamber where Harriet Sherwood operates, the question of what Palestinians actually believe about peace and violence is far less important than the role assigned to them in a drama where the antagonists and protagonists have been pre-determined.
UKMW prompts correction to Daily Mail article accepting Hamas claim “Israel killed” Ibrahim Abu Thuraya
UK Media Watch prompted a correction to a Daily Mail article which reported, as if it’s a fact, Gaza Health Ministry claims that Israel killed Ibrahim Abu Thuraya during violent protests on the Gaza border last month. The new article has several additional sentences outlining the IDF statement which casts serious doubt about these Palestinian claims.
The Guardian report, through their egregious omission, as well as legitimising a risible comparison between Tamimi and the Pakistani heroine, obfuscated the Palestinian teen’s disturbing support for murdering Israeli civilians – representing yet another example of the media group’s ongoing efforts to whitewash widespread Palestinian support for violence.
Narrowing down an entire year of Guardian anti-Israel reporting on Israel to the seven most egregious examples is not an easy task, but, as a public service to our loyal readers, here are a few errors and lies by their contributors and reporters in 2017 which especially stand out:
The Israeli government now partners with the most powerful country in the world to provide energy for tens of millions of Africans. Yet somehow, there was no coverage of this story in the media. This is a significant development in dealing with a central humanitarian issue that has seen regular coverage over the past few years. Yet when Israel gets involved the pens fall silent. Why? Why is there an aversion to reporting a positive story about Israel?
Given the IDF statement, and the fact that the Hamas health ministry refused to cooperate with the IDF investigation, at the end of the day, media reports that Abu Thuraya was killed by an IDF sniper are based entirely on unsubstantiated Hamas claims.
Regardless of the Guardian writer’s intent, it’s extremely troubling that editors at a self-styled ‘anti-racist’ publication would sanction words which necessarily evoke such a historically toxic, antisemitic calumny while ruminating on the motives of Israeli Jews.
The Dec. 19th article in The Independent failed to provide the Israeli response to the incident, leaving readers with a take on the the death of Ibrahim Abu Thuraya informed entirely by the unsubstantiated claims of Hamas officials.
During his speech in Istanbul, Mahmoud Abbas not only claimed that Jews fabricate their history in the land – reinforcing the Palestinian lie that Jews have no connection to Jerusalem – but that Jews are liars by nature. Remarkably, even UK media outlets which covered Abbas’s Istanbul address and cited some of his remarks (such as the Guardian, Telegraph and Times of London) managed to ignore the antisemitic part.
As Karma Nabulsi’s polemical assault on Jewish national rights in their ancestral homeland again indicates, the Palestinian national movement is governed far more by antipathy towards Jews and propaganda, than by truth, justice or historical accuracy.
UKMW prompts Times of London correction to claim E. Jerusalem Palestinians have ‘no political rights’.
An article in the Sunday Times on US recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital included the false claim that east Jerusalem Palestinians, who are permanent residents but not citizens, have “no political rights”. After communication with UKMW, editors agreed to amend the passage to reflect the fact that east Jerusalem Palestinians have the right to vote in local elections and to run for city council.
Palestinian leaders demanded that Donald Trump’s decision to recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s capital be framed as (another) “death knell” to the peace process, one that shatters the decades long two-state dreams of Palestinians, and that’s exactly what Rafi Sanchez at The Telegraph delivered.
K Media Watch and CAMERA have prompted countless corrections on the same inaccuracy – the claim that Tel Aviv is Israel’s capital. However, it’s particularly interesting that on Thursday, the day in which Donald Trump’s impending decision to officially recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s capital was the big story, the Financial Times joined the list of media outlets who’ve made some version of this error.
The Economist’s claim that the Palestinian Authority President has rejected violence since 2005 fails to pass even minimum critical scrutiny.
As we explained in our complaint to Times editors, the language used by their reporter erroneously suggests that then opposition leader Ariel Sharon visited a uniquely ‘Muslim’ holy site, when in fact his 34 minute tour was to the Temple Mount (Judaism’s holiest site). Though al-Aqsa Mosque is located within the larger Temple Mount compound, Sharon did not visit the mosque itself.
There is a clear picture being presented by the Guardian, whereby the Israeli government is becoming more and more extreme, making life for Israel Arabs a misery with no prospects for improvement. But is this really true? An examination of the record of this government reveals a very different picture – this much maligned government has actually done a very significant amount to improve the lives of Israeli Arabs.
What makes an editor leave in a comment such as “Jewish people are good with money”? And what makes the main presenter not pick up such a comment? This was the scenario in Chris Tarrant’s Extreme Railways shown on Channel 5 on Monday night when Tarrant visited Jordan and Israel. In Jordan he travelled the route of the now defunct Hejaz Railway and visited Petra.
The repeated media lie that ‘Tel Aviv is Israel’s capital’ represents a broader UK media pattern of what we call ‘advocacy journalism’: the belief held by many reporters that they have a moral duty (in the spirit of ‘comforting the afflicted and afflicting the powerful’) to advocate on behalf of Palestinians and give credence to their narrative, a duty which transcends their ethical responsibilities as professional journalists to be objective and tell the truth.
It’s not just that the Guardian gives the erroneous impression that the movement is larger and more influential than it really is. Their contributors, journalists and editors also continually downplay the true goals of BDS, misleadingly casting their leaders as ‘progressives’ who merely seek to end the occupation.
Jackie Walker is the former Vice-Chair of Britain’s far-left group Momentum who was suspended from the Labour Party due to accusations of antisemitism. In the Sunday Observer (sister publication of the Guardian), Alexei Sayle lauded Walker’s play “The Lynching”, a theatrical attempt to justify and explain the views that made her controversial.
Once again, the Guardian has erased a chapter within the well-documented ethnic cleansing of over 800,000 Jews from Arab countries in the mid 20th century. The latest example involves the history of Jews in Iraq, in the context of a short review by their film critic Peter Bradshaw of Fiona Murphy’s documentary ‘Remembering Baghdad’.
Would the Daily Mail ever describe an attack in London by black men on a Jewish man as a ‘black attack’ or highlight the attacker’s skin colour in the headline? Unless there’s recently been a spate of such acts of violence in London by orthodox Jews, we fail to see why the religion of these alleged attackers is pertinent to the story at all.
Once again, a British publication has told news consumers Tel Aviv is the capital of Israel, and, once again, UK Media Watch has prompted a correction to this false claim. The most recent example involves a Daily Mail article in the Nov. 7th print edition about the Priti Patel row.
Following our complaints to Daily Mail editors, we received a reply from the journalist who wrote the piece, apologising for using the word “tentacles” to describe the influence of a pro-Israel group in the UK. He explained that he was unfamiliar with its antisemitic associations and informed us that the word would be removed from the op-ed.
Despite the continuous amplification of BDS in the British media, the movement to boycott Israel has had no discernible impact on Israel’s economy, and each month we see more and more examples of Israeli success and BDS fails. Here’s the latest installment in our ongoing series of posts documenting this dynamic.
Israel, and only Israel, is judged exclusively by a list of its (perceived and real) flaws. With remarkable confidence, journalists throw together opinions, a few stories, select quotes, and feelings of impending doom – and hey presto, Israel is demonised. Israel is not a uniquely bad country. Journalism about Israel is often uniquely bad journalism