It’s difficult to know which is worse about this Daily Mirror photo essay: the fact that they completely obfuscated the terror dimension of Gaza’s tunnels, glorified Hamas’s abuse of children or unethically used four-year old photos while presenting them as current.
By citing just three seemingly damning words within a longer, more nuanced interview with the head of Israeli Electric about the power shortage in Gaza, the Indy journalist did what the Indy does best: taking the comments and actions of Israelis and Israeli leaders out of context to impute maximum malevolence.
The Economist is currently promoting a seven-part “special report” titled “Six days of war, 50 years of occupation”. The online version of the unattributed sixth installment goes under the title “The half-life on an occupied Palestine”. The article, quite predictably, solely blames Israel for the occupation and suggests that Palestinians have no responsibility for the ongoing conflict
I do understand Sarah Helm’s desire to paint Hamas in a positive light in her May 19 article at the Guardian. I too wish that their intentions were as positive as she seems determined to present them as being; peace between Israel and the Palestinians – the magical goal that every politician yearns for – would be so much more easily attainable.
Following communication with Telegraph editors, the erroneous claim was removed.
In addition to the false suggestion that there’s a concrete wall surrounding Gaza, the claim that “with few exceptions, no one has been allowed in or out since…2007” is absurd, as data from UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs in the occupied Palestinian territory (OCHA oPt) demonstrates.
Once again, we see how the media’s default narrative, regardless of the particulars, is to hold Israel responsible for every conceivable social and political ill within Palestinian society, while downplaying or ignoring the role its leaders plays in perpetuating their suffering.
The Times of London headline – suggesting the existence of heretofore unseen Hamas peaceniks – is absurd. There are no “hawks and doves” within the movement, but only extremists who differ slightly in their willingness to tailor their message for Western audiences.
The report (“Israel ‘blocking human rights researchers’”, March 3), by Gabriel Samuels, cited HRW’s accusation that Israel has been “preventing foreign researchers from entering the Gaza Strip to document potential abuses”, but failed to seek comment from NGO Monitor, the group most knowledgeable about the Israel related work of the group.
We have got so used to these extreme critiques of settlements, that we forget the basis on which they rest – that for a Palestinian state to exist, there must be no Jews whatsoever within its territory. This assumption is often unchallenged, but when one analyses it, it is hard to characterise it as anything other racist.
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.
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 […]
There are many reasonable criticisms of British and French involvement in the war, but to characterize the military action to end an illegal blockade of Israeli ships as an “unprovoked” attack is just absurd.
By failing to explain why the security fence dividing Israel with the West Bank was erected in the first place, and by erroneously suggesting that Jerusalem is a racially segregated city, the Guardian once again grossly misleads readers by favouring narrative over nuanced reality in describing everyday life in the Jewish state.
Cross posted from the blog of Yisrael Medad I posted a comment to this op-ed in The Guardian, entitled: Don’t worry! Clinton and Trump are going to fix Israel/Palestine by Moustafa Bayoumi, a student of […]
We recently posted about an attack, during the summer 2014 war, on a Gaza home which killed nearly a dozen members of the Siyyam family in light of a new IDF Military Attorney General (MAG) report which concluded that the family was NOT in fact killed by an IDF aerial attack. The MAG report concluded that an errant Hamas rocket was likely to blame.
Both the Guardian and the Telegraph failed to note that their previous 2014 reports claimed – as if it was an uncontroversial fact – that Israel was responsible for the attack on the family. Additionally, those original articles have not been amended to reflect this new information suggesting that an errant Hamas rocket was to blame for the tragedy.
One of the benefits of our transition from focusing entirely on the Guardian to monitoring all UK media outlets is that we’re now better able to contextualize Israel related news reports and […]
Cross-posted from BBC Watch. Well over 24 hours after the incident took place, a day after colleagues at BBC Arabic published two articles on the story and following the appearance of this […]