The implicit argument that the religious background alone of David Friedman and Jared Kushner renders them biased, and may help explain US policy, is a toxic and racist charge that should have no place in mainstream British publications.
The Itamar couple was gunned down in front of their four children while driving the family car, and As-Sayeh’s was found responsible for funding and authorizing it. While AFP and Independent Arabia mentioned his involvement as merely an Israeli accusation used to justify his “arrest” (thus omitting his conviction), Sky News Arabia ignored his connection to the attack altogether:
To their credit, shortly after notifying the Financial Times journalist of this error, the passage was revised, and no longer alleges that Oslo committed Israel to the creation of a Palestinian state.
The original article included the wild and completely unsubstantiated claim that, upon invading Lebanon in 1982, the IDF rounded up “all males” as young as 9 years old.
At 2:50 pm Israeli time, the Independent published an article about a proposed Israeli law that would have installed cameras at all polling stations. However, the article was outdated, as, hours before the Indy published their piece, the bill in question was defeated in committee.
Though the Telegraph is normally responsible when it comes to avoiding language that could be seen as antisemitic, this particular sentence clearly serves to legitimise the historically toxic dual loyalty trope, codified as antisemitic by the IHRA Working Definition.
The main point – one that we’ve made continuously at this blog when getting corrections from UK outlets suggesting that Tel Aviv was Israel’s capital – is that, regardless of the question over diplomatic recognition, Jerusalem has been Israel’s official capital since 1949. It is the seat of government, and the city where the Knesset, Supreme Court, Prime Minster’s office and most government ministries are located.
Sky News Arabia did not address the terror attack directly at all. However, after three days, in a report entitled “Israel avenges the ‘Dolev attack’ with 300 houses in the settlements”, it falsely described the innocent victim of the attack as “a settler”,
All of the British publications we surveyed ignored the UN report criticising the Palestinian Authority, despite the fact that most of the outlets routinely report on the UN’s egregiously disproportionate reports critical of Israel.
Though we contacted Daily Mail editors to ask for an editor’s note acknowledging the error, in light of the fact that the claim was made in an actual paper map that nearly one million Britons received (and not merely online), the damage can’t really be undone.
A round-up of the week’s Middle East related background reading.
So this Guardian piece downplays the Holocaust, attempts to turn Jews within Israel against each other and, in my opinion, compares Israeli policy to the Nazis
This is a cross post from BBC Watch.
When last Friday, a few days after her 17th birthday, beautiful Israeli teenager Rina Shnerb was murdered by a terrorist while she was out trekking with her family, and some Palestinians celebrated her murder, the truth-to-power-speaking Guardian journalism suddenly stopped.
The BBC Jerusalem bureau correspondents repeatedly describe the missile arsenals of the Gaza Strip based terrorist organisations as “homemade rockets”.
All four versions of the report also closed with the BBC’s standard but partial mantra on ‘settlements’ and ‘international law’ despite the fact that it has nothing to do with the story ostensibly being reported.
Middle East related background reading.
PTSD is a serious issue in Israel and every country, but to single out the Israeli government for the accusation of “abandoning” its soldiers must be another low for Guardian journalism.
The Guardian has a trendy hip-hop section but after reading Tom Faber’s recent interview with Palestinian hip-hop duo BLTNM, made up of Shabjdeed and Al Nather, we weren’t sure if the piece’s main aim was to profile them or whitewash Israel out of existence.
It’s rare to see Israel’s argument laid out in any news article let alone in The Guardian. Holmes shows that Israel’s refusal to allow Tlaib and Omar entry isn’t simply “to quiet anti-occupation activism”.
This is a cross post from BBC Watch.
This is a cross-post from BBC Watch
In Kenya it’s a ‘safe space’. In Israel it’s ‘discrimination’.
This is a cross post from BBC Watch Earlier this week we documented descriptions in BBC World Service radio news bulletins of a premeditated demonstration of intolerance at a site holy to […]
Our analysis showed that, based on our review of other news outlets that published a version of that same AP article, the Guardian was the only one that omitted AP’s paragraph noting the Palestinian violence which caused the clashes.
Other than the Guardian, every news outlet we surveyed that published a version of the same AP report included that original paragraph noting the Palestinian violence which caused the clashes on Sunday – providing another example of how the Guardian routinely omits important facts in order to obfuscate Palestinian culpability.
At the end of the day, the reports all relied on the same premise: only a clear distinction between good Jews and Zionists could exonerate Tunisian Jewry and clear them of the charge of being “Zionists in Jews’ clothing”.
Those Labour activists who advocate for anti-Zionism (an opposition to the existence of a Jewish state) are doing just that by demanding that, for acceptance into their ‘progressive’ community, Jews renounce and abandon a key component of their Jewish identity.
We complained about the omission to ITV News, encouraged our followers to do the same, and directly tweeted their international editor – all of which eventually resulted in the addition of the following new sentence to the article.
Though we never heard back from Guardian editors, the journalist, to her credit, did eventually respond to apologise, and informed us that the sentence would be corrected.
In comparisons to other British media outlets, The Times is normally one of the more reasonable and thoughtful news outlets in their coverage of the Israel-Palestinian issue and antisemitism in the UK, a fact that makes their glorification of a pro-violence, antisemitic teen especially perplexing.
After ten years, we remain dedicated to promoting accurate coverage of Israel, and to combating antisemitic narratives and tropes which often accompany reports compromised by anti-Israel bias.
In June, journalist Melanie Phillips and former Israeli MK Einat Wilf participated in an Intelligence Squared debate in London in which proposed the motion “Anti-Zionism is antisemitism” before a largely anti-Israel audience. They were opposed by academic Illan Pappé and journalist Mehdi Hasan.
In 2017 the BBC expanded its links with the news agency AFP as part of its newsgathering process. Unlike many other media outlets – including the corporation’s preferred paper the Guardian – […]
The Guardian review suggests there’s little self-criticism or reflection on display from these Palestinian writers – no evidence of stories in the anthology premised on the view that Palestinians are masters their own fate, that a distopian future is not pre-ordained and that better Palestinian decisions in 2019 will likely result in better outcomes in 2048.
Called “No Room for anti-Semites, We’re Already Full,” the website provides “some basic tools to understand antisemitism so that we can hide it better.”
Ultimately, what Bell is doing is gas-lighting British Jews, dismissing their profound fears about the hatred directed to their community, and lending credibility to those bigots who view the entire row as a conspiracy to bring down their beloved leader.
The truncated quote significantly alters the true meaning and significance of the prime minister’s words, and thus fails to adhere to the Editors’ Code, which demands that newspapers avoid publishing inaccurate, misleading or distorted information.
Even by British media standards, this represents an egregious example of anti-Israel bias, as not a word in the report even alludes to Israel’s motivation for erecting the security barrier – the 2nd Intifada’s campaign of Palestinian suicide bombing that claimed the lives of hundreds of Israeli civilians in the early 2000s.
His email provides yet more evidence that, even by Guardian standards, Bell is an extremist in his hatred of Israel and what appears to be his utter contempt for the values and concerns of British Jews.
Thus far, most British media outlets – including the Guardian, Independent, Telegraph and BBC – have ignored Hammad’s call for genocide, a speech, our sister site BBC Watch observed, that’s at odds with the media narrative of the Great March of Return, which has downplayed such extreme antisemitic incitement, whilst characterising the violent riots as mere “protests”.
Here’s the latest installment in our ongoing series of posts documenting BDS fails.
Even for those who avoid employing explicit classic antisemitic tropes while vilifying Israel, the acceptance of the view that the Jewish state isn’t merely a state that’s flawed as all states are, but, rather, represents, as the late Robert Wistrich phrased it, a singularly “organic obstacle to peace and progress” necessarily vilifies Jews qua Jews.
The Guardian is now indistinguishable from the very antisemitic organs that the newspaper itself used to hate
Though the Guardian occasionally acknowledges – albeit perfunctorily – the profound fears of the Jewish community amidst a Labour Party that has become institutionally antisemitic, their editorial decisions more often than not suggest an ideological inclination to legitimise those racist voices within the hard left who believe the entire row is some sort of anti-Corbyn plot hatched by embittered ‘Blairites and Zionists’.
We’re not sure at this point if the article has been temporarily removed pending an edit, or if it was taken down for good. Either way, it marks a positive trend within the British media whereby editors are far less inclined than they used to defend the counterfactual assertion that Tel Aviv is the capital of Israel.
Regardless of journalists’ individual views on the logic behind the economics-first approach of the new US peace plan, their insistence on treating Palestinians and their leaders like children by robbing them of agency serves, as much as any other single factor, to grossly distort their readers’ understanding of the conflict.
Contrary to claims by Sky, AFP and Reuters, Jordan does not have a guardianship role over Jerusalem’s Christian holy sites.
While the BBC gave generous coverage to Palestinian Authority and PLO talking points throughout its coverage of the Bahrain conference – and not least their claim to aspire to a ‘two-state solution’ – it has to date completely ignored those threats of violence and the PA’s intimidation of Palestinian citizens.
In a classic case of burying the lede, the Guardian obfuscated the fact that the only baby among the triplets born in the Jerusalem hospital to have survived did so because she received intensive state-of-the-art medical care for six months – the same exact level of care that a Jewish baby would have received.