A Jerusalem court recently ruled in favor of a female passenger who sued El Al when she was asked by a flight attendant to move seats at the behest of an ultra-Orthodox man. She was not forced to move seats, but was merely asked – a request the court still found to be illegal. Nonetheless, reports by Times of London and the Guardian botched this crucial detail.
As we explained in a subsequent complaint to Times editors, the Gush Etzion main communities were founded before 1948, in the 1920s and 1930s, on land legally purchased by Jews. Jews living at the original Kibbutzim were killed during the 1929 Arab riots, then re-established and destroyed again during Arab revolt of 1936-1939. Though the communities were re-established in the 1940s, they were again destroyed by Arabs fighters during the 1948 war.
The Guardian’s claim regarding the putative position of “Israeli” thinktanks on the Saudi-UAE isolation of Qatar not only comes completely out of nowhere, and is seemingly irrelevant, but is also erroneous. The link embedded in the claim takes you to an article in Middle East Eye, which clearly identifies the think tank as Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD), a thinktank based in Washington, D.C., not Israel. We contacted Guardian editors, who upheld our complaint and revised the passage accordingly.
Times of London editors upheld our complaint and revised the sentence in question to note that it was only the opinion of former UN General Secretary that Israel had committed crimes against children, not an indisputable fact.
Following communication with Telegraph editors, the erroneous claim was removed.
it is certainly obvious that BBC Arabic (which is of course part funded by British taxpayers through FCO grants) has yet to satisfactorily address the issue of the use of inaccurate and politically partisan language by its Arabic-speaking employees.
Editors at The Independent upheld our complaint that the headline accompanying a February 5th article falsely suggested that there’s an Israeli “wall” which completely surrounds Gaza.
We finally received a response from the Guardian Readers’ Editor, informing us that the correction was made. Editors removed the sentence suggesting the existence of a wall surrounding the Israeli city of Haifa, and added an addendum noting the change.
As we argued in an email to Daily Mail editors that passage about “Israeli attacks on Palestinian civilians” is a classic case of blurring news with opinion, suggesting that it’s an uncontroversial fact that Israel (intentionally) attacks civilians, rather than the highly contested opinion of some.
We emailed Financial Times editors, noting that the original headline of the article misled readers into believing that Dubai leads the Middle East in start-ups. Of course, Israel leads in this category. Editors agreed, and revised the headline.
Whilst we commend Indy editors for removing the article, the fact that one of their Middle East correspondents respects and was willing to amplify the views of such an anti-Zionist extremist serves as a troubling reminder of institutional anti-Israel bias which informs so much of their coverage of the region.
As we’ve noted in countless posts, Judaism’s holiest site is the Temple Mount, not the Western Wall. UK Media Watch previously prompted corrections on this same issue at The Independent, and Telegraph.
Here are recent corrections prompted by UKMW to articles at the Guardian, Daily Mail and Independent.
It’s important to stress that Walker’s accusation that many Jews were chief financiers of the slave trade is not true according to an examination by historian Eli Farber, documented in his book ‘Jews, Slaves and the Slave Trade: setting the record straight’. Jews’ role in the slave trade was actually minimal, according to Farber’s research
We contacted Times of London editors regarding the quote, and they upheld our complaint about the fake use of the word “fake”.
For the third time in three weeks – and the fifth time since last June – we’ve prompted a correction at Times of London over this erroneous suggestion regarding the status of Tel Aviv. The latest example involves a March 1st article by Gregg Carlstrom titled “Netanyahu lambasted by report on Gaza war”.
Indy editors upheld our complaint and amended the passage, which now at least includes Erdan’s unequivocal denial of Masot’s alleged affiliation with his ministry.
Contrary to the Times of Israel claim, the bill says that Palestinians who proves ownership of the land is entitled to financial compensation of 125% of the land value, or an alternative plot of land, according to his or her choice.
It’s important to note that, in 2012, the Press Complaints Commission ruled that it is wrong to state that Tel Aviv is the capital of Israel.
Whatever one’s views on Israeli construction across the green line, the narrative often advanced in the UK media – of new settlements expanding at ‘a record pace’, eating away at ‘huge swaths’ of Palestinian territory and rendering a future Palestinian state nearly impossible – is, at best, extraordinarily misleading.