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.
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.
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.
A Guardian editorial claimed that Israel has ‘banned’ Arab political parties. In fact, as we noted in a complaint to editors, though there was, in 2009, a decision by the Israel Central Elections Committee to bar two Israeli Arab parties due to allegations they supported terrorism, the Israeli Supreme Court overturned the ‘ban’ only two weeks later, before it could go into effect. The Guardian upheld our complaint and issued a correction.
UKMW prompts Financial Times correction – editors admit there are no ‘Jews-only roads’ in West Bank.
An article in the Financial Times included the claim that there are ‘Jews-only’ roads in the West Bank. However, as CAMERA has demonstrated on multiple occasions, there are not, nor have there ever been, anywhere in Israel or the West Bank, roads exclusively for Jews.
Beyond the specific lies and distortions in Abbas’s Guardian op-ed lay a broader one: that Palestinians are victims who possess no moral agency and that Palestinian leadership shares no responsibility for their people’s suffering. It’s not merely unfair to assigned exclusive blame to Israel for every conceivable Palestinian failure, but also suggests a fundamental flaw in the Palestinian national movement.
For the sixth time in less than two years, UK Media Watch has prompted a correction at Times of London to the false suggestion that Tel Aviv is Israel’s capital.
There are not, nor have there ever been, anywhere in Israel or the West Bank, roads exclusively for Jews. False claims over the years at multiple media outlets suggesting the existence of […]
Following our complaint to Times of London over an Oct. 13th article by Bel True and Anshel Pfeffer which erroneously suggested that only Israel considers Hamas a terror organisation, editors revised the sentence to note that the UK, US and EU also official designate Hamas a terror group.
An Oct. 6th review of the play ‘Oslo’ published in The Economist included the following paragraph: …there are glimpses of a shared humanity as the characters warm to each other, sprint around […]
The Guardian’s suggestion that there are haredi-only hospitals is just absurd, as anyone familiar with Israeli hospitals would surely know. Whilst Bikur Cholim Hospital in Jerusalem likely treats a large number of Haredim (due to its close proximity to Haredi neighborhoods), like all Israeli hospitals, it treats all patients who come through its doors, regardless of religious background.