Beyond the bias within this specific Guardian analysis, the truth is that UK media coverage of negotiations similarly suffers from the failure to take Israeli concerns seriously – rational fears born of the failure of past territorial withdrawals to bring peace, and a refusal to ignore the reactionary Palestinian political culture which – most Israeli believe – lays at the root of the conflict.
Hebron is an important city to Israelis and Palestinians, to Jews and to Muslims, and the situation there is complex. The UK media should reflect this complexity, rather than warping a story to fit premade ideological outlooks.
Earlier today, we heard back from Sky producers, informing us that they upheld our complaint and thanked us for bringing the information to their attention – particularly the AP correction.
CAMERA and other watchdog groups have refuted Adalah’s claims that there are 50 “racist laws” in Israel – a term used so carelessly by the NGO that even an Israeli public health law requiring that parents vaccinate their children is bizarrely included on their list of “racist laws”.
The Qatari government-funded channel appears to have embarked on an exercise that is nothing more than straightforward Jew-baiting dressed up as an investigation.
The fact that Rafsanjani was relatively more liberal than his contemporaries in Iran should not be used to cover up the uncomfortable truth – that anti-Israel hatred pervades all elements of the Iranian leadership, “moderates” and conservatives alike.
However you want to characterise demographic changes in the holy city since 1967, the implicit suggestion that Palestinians have been or are currently being ethnically cleansed in Jerusalem (or anywhere else in Israel for that matter) is the opposite of the truth.
By turning a complex and vexing political dispute into a binary moral paradigm, reducing the historical and diplomatic complexities of a more than 100 year-long conflict to one territorial dispute, and dismissing authentic, historically-informed Israeli fears of Palestinian intentions as nothing more than a failure of empathy and imagination, Emily Hilton is certainly not “challenging narratives”.
Yesterday, we posted and tweeted about the following egregious error in a report at The Telegraph on the scandal surrounding comments by a low-level Israeli employee, Shai Masot, uncovered by an Al […]
Al Jazeera on Sunday published “bombshell footage” covertly filmed in a West London restaurant involving Shai Masot, a political officer at the Israeli embassy, and Maria Strizzola, a civil servant and former aide […]
Written by Jonathan Hoffman. The original version of this post was published at Jewish News. Professor David Feldman is the Director of the Pears Institute for the Study of Antisemitism in London […]
Yesterday, most major UK news outlets were quick to report on the guilty verdict of Israeli soldier Elor Azaria, convicted in a military court for shooting to death a wounded Palestinian attacker, Abdel […]
A guest post by Aron White A few weeks ago, Jewish Chronicle editor Stephen Pollard drew attention to the BBC`s “soft boycott” of Israel. The term, coined by Mr Pollard, describes the […]
Yesterday, we posted about an inaccurate headline accompanying a Jan. 1st Times of London article by Gregg Carlstrom. We demonstrated that no Israeli settlers – according to the text of the actual article […]
Here’s the headline accompanying a Jan. 1st Times of London article by Gregg Carlstrom. There are two elements of the headline that are interesting. First, the article primarily deals with Palestinian complaints […]
This is a cross post from BBC Watch An item in the December 28th edition of the BBC Radio 4 programme ‘The World Tonight’ related to the speech given by the outgoing US Secretary of […]
This is a guest post by Aron White. The discussion and analysis of Resolution 2334, passed by the Security Council last week, is still continuing in earnest. But in all the coverage […]
This is a cross post from BBC Watch As was noted here in an earlier post, while BBC coverage of the UN Security Council’s adoption of resolution 2334 included reactions from “the Palestinian […]
This is a cross post from BBC Watch. In part one of this post we looked at the way in which the BBC presented UN Security Council resolution 2334 to listeners to […]
This is a cross post from BBC Watch. The Community Security Trust (CST) recently published its annual report (available here) on the topic of Antisemitic Discourse in Britain for the year 2015. The […]
This is a cross post from BBC Watch. Events at the UN Security Council received generous coverage on the BBC News website on December 23rd and 24th. BBC audiences found articles relating […]
At this time, we’d like to wish all of those who follow us – those (both friend and ‘foe’) who read the blog, comment below the line, follow us on Twitter and like us on Facebook – […]
Among those objecting to the government’s decision to adopt the Working Definition of Antisemitism were a group of anti-Zionists in the UK (such as Tony Greenstein) whose letter – accusing British Jews of falsely crying antisemitism to silence debate about Israel – appeared in the Guardian on Dec. 17th.
Subsequent U.S. administrations – through Obama – have maintained the same position. Though they’ve obviously disapproved of Israeli construction across the green line, they did not label them as “illegal”.
The wording of the Indy’s poll is extremely misleading, as it suggests that the mere criticism of Israel is defined as antisemitic by the WD. However, as the WD adopted by Theresa May makes perfectly clear, mere criticism of Israel is absolutely NOT considered antisemitic.
“International Law & the State of Israel: Legitimacy, Responsibility and Exceptionalism” is little more than the recycling of aged terrorist conflict-propaganda in an academic setting.
The Guardian, The Sun, The Telegraph, The Spectator, the Evening Standard and the Daily Mail all reported on Jeremy Corbyn’s controversial appointment of Jayne Fisher, a former Sinn Fein staffer who worked for Gerry […]
Not for the first time, the Guardian`s coverage of this Israeli story says far more about the Guardian than it does about Israel. The Israeli Knesset has a dress code that is not in the least bit noteworthy or surprising – but for the Guardian, this is another opportunity to demonise Israel.
In addition to holding informal meetings with activists on the ground, Levick will give two public talks: at Limmud in Birmingham on Dec. 26th, and for the Manchester Zionist Central Council on Dec. 28th.
Indy op-ed on UK position that ‘Opposing Israel’s existence = antisemitism’ penned by guy opposed to Israel’s existence
Criticism of the Jewish state becomes antisemitic when it holds the state to a moral standard no other state is held to, and when it evokes historic antisemitic tropes and narratives – such as the view that Jews (individually or collectively) represent a uniquely malevolent force in the world, an “organic obstacle [to] peace and progress”.
This morning, multiple news outlets reported that the British government will adopt the Working Definition of Antisemitism. Downing Street said that the WD would assist “in efforts to fight hate crimes and incitement targeting Jews” and by ensuring that “culprits will not be able to get away with being antisemitic because the term is ill-defined, or because different organisations or bodies have different interpretations of it”.
Even if you are not convinced that the Zionism = Racism canard is not antisemitic in intent, it is undeniably antisemitic in effect, because such a characterization necessarily means that Jews (the overwhelming majority of whom are Zionists) support a racist ideology.
Today, the National Union of Students (NUS), the body representing seven million students in the UK, has its national conference. One Jewish delegate, Izzy Lenga, has written an article “Why I won`t be at tomorrow`s NUS NEC meeting”, in which she describes the hostile environment that Jewish students are facing on campus in general, and from student leadership in particular.
If the Guardian journalist had done some fact checking, he would have easily found such evidence clearly contradicting the WCC spokesperson’s claims that they have “no connection to BDS”.
As readers of The London Magazine will learn in the latest issue of the publication, the American writer Ben Ehrenreich thinks “that the word ‘terrorism’ forms this very powerful narrative function in silencing Palestinian voices and giving the sole authority to Israelis.”
The Independent continues to lead the British media pack when it comes to story selections designed to paint Israel in the worst possible light. Here’s a recent example from the Indy’s Israel page of two stories published within a day of each other which each focusing on sexual attitudes within Israeli society.
Though most in the West could be forgiven for failing to appreciate that Israelis have a life beyond the conflict and actually occupy themselves with quotidian concerns such as ‘What’s on TV?”, the reality is that – in addition to the fact that Israelis can now (legally) enjoy popular Netflix shows like The Crown and House of Cards – the country has actually become one of the world’s leading exporters of home-grown tv show formats.
When the Guardian talks about Benjamin Netanyahu`s election victory, there is no semblance of balance. Netanyahu is described as having “crossed red lines,” “dealt a grievous blow to any prospect of peace process,” and is accused of having “trampled” upon democratic principles
Here’s the latest installment in our ongoing series of posts highlighting BDS Fails.
We contacted Times of London editors to ask if they typically use the word “Jews” (in their headlines) as a synonym for “Israel”, “Israelis” or “Israeli MKs”.
Yesterday, we posted about an article titled: ‘The Economist Explains: The status of Arabic speakers in Israel‘, included the bizarre claim that “Arabic songs were banned from Israeli radio for several decades.” We contacted the editor responsible for the article, who promptly responded to inform us that they upheld our complaint and removed the sentence in question.
A Nov. 27th article in The Economist titled ‘The Economist Explains: The status of Arabic speakers in Israel’, included the claim that “Arabic songs were banned from Israeli radio for several decades.” However, evidence suggests there couldn’t possibly have been such a ban (“for several decades”) on Arabic songs.
Our point isn’t to debate the merits of the Knesset’s muezzin bill, but to question why Fraser highlighted only Israeli efforts to limit noise from mosque loudspeakers – in a column focused on noise from a British airport – when he could have used similar examples from anywhere in the world.
Arab leaders have always treated Palestinian refugees as a political, rather than a humanitarian issue, and have placed political attacks against Israel above the welfare of the Palestinian people.
As the Jerusalem Post noted, the most recent FBI hate crime stats for 2015 showed that a shocking 53.3 percent of the religiously motivated hate crimes (or 664 incidents) were directed at Jews, who make up less than 2 percent of the population.
By uncritically repeating such toxic canards, and fail to make a serious effort to separate facts from anti-Zionist fiction, the Indy may increasingly be viewed by many within the British Jewish community as something akin to a purveyor of fake news about the Jewish state.
British magazine collaborates with Palestine Solidarity Campaign to produce ‘news’ about Israel (Update)
Though the PSC (whose Patrons include Jenny Tonge and Caryl Churchill) has every right to spread this kind of propaganda, the New Statesman – which, despite it’s hostility to Israel, fancies itself a serious news magazine guided by “scepticism” and “free thinking” – owes its readers more than to amplify, license and legitimise such one-sided, intellectually unserious hyperbole.
Cross posted from the blog of the Zionist Federation Prolific anti-Israel campaigner Ben White has announced the publication of his latest book: “The 2014 Gaza War: 21 Questions And Answers.” Given that […]