We surveyed hundreds of tweets, spanning three years, by British journalist Sarah Helm and uncovered what we suspected all along: Helm is a pro-Palestinian activist. Not a journalist.
Following communication with UK Media Watch, editors at the Daily Mail corrected an article which had falsely claimed that no terror group in Gaza claimed responsibility for the recent barrage of rockets fired at Israel.
It is becoming increasingly clear that Hamas pushes Gaza’s people into harm’s way because it knows their suffering will strike a chord across the West. Because it knows images of their hardship will be shared widely, wept over, and held up as proof of the allegedly uniquely barbarous nature of the Jewish State.
The result of our work isn’t revolutionary change in their reporting from the region, but significantly improved coverage. In life, as in media monitoring, the perfect is often the enemy of the good.
Indy falsely claims Israeli troops “were ordered to use live fire” on 40,000 demonstrators (Updated)
This is but one extraordinarily misleading sentence within the cacophony of sensational, biased and misleading headlines, photos and articles published in the British media since late March. Yet, it aptly demonstrates how language is often chosen by reporters not with painstaking attention to the veracity of the information being conveyed but in order to serve the broader narrative of Israeli villainy and Palestinian victimhood.
If you defend Israel’s actions in Gaza, your ethical impulses are, according to the Guardian columnist, not those of an ordinary human being. It would be difficult to find a better illustration of why so many Jews believe that media coverage of Israel incites antisemitism than a column suggesting that they, by virtue of their pro-Israeli political views, are morally deranged, even sub-human.
UKMW prompts Times of London correction to claim 1st Hamas suicide bombing was retaliation for Cave of Patriarchs massacre.
Last week, following communication with UK Media Watch, Times of London editors corrected a false claim, in an article by David Aaronovitch, that the first Hamas suicide bombing was an act of retaliation in response to Baruch Goldstein’s massacre of 29 Muslim worshipers in 1994.
Contrary to the Guardian Jerusalem correspondent’s claim, Hamas has not “softened” its founding charter’s rejection of Israel’s existence, nor has it abandoned its promotion of violence to achieve this end.
Guardian accuses Israel of “war crimes” in shooting “protesters” who “posed no credible threat”.
However, in what world do thousands of rioters attempting the breach the border of a sovereign democratic state, at the behest of a proscribed terror group, not represent a “credible threat”?
the Channel 4 News presenter wasn’t interested in providing relevant context, nor investigating the real cause of poverty, suicide and child abuse in Gaza – or the wider issue of Hamas’s role in Gaza’s isolation and misery. His sole objective was to produce a segment consistent with the desired media narrative of cruel Israelis inflicting suffering upon innocent Palestinians.
The Guardian once again has demonised Israel, smearing the state as one defined primarily by racism and violence – an ugly caricature which has little resemblance to reality. The notion that Jerusalem should take security advice from the Corbyn-sympathising London intelligentsia is as risible as their suggestion that its citizens should take seriously the moralizing tales of Israeli darkness by the Hollywood left.
On April 8th 2018, Sky News Arabia published an item with the headline: “A Palestinian injured by a settler in the West Bank”. Camera-Arabic researchers noticed that the headline was inaccurate, as it creates the impression that the injured Palestinian was an innocent man who was shot by a settler without justification.
The only difference between Hamas and Ahmad Abu Artema, the Great Return March chief organiser, is that Hamas is a terror group founded on the idea that Israel has no right to exist, and Abu Artema is a “non-violent” activist dedicated to the idea that Israel has no right to exist.
The claim by the Indy journalist that Fatah as founded to promote the creation of a Palestinian state shouldn’t be seen as merely a one-off factual error, but, rather, an example of a larger media pattern of casting Palestinians as the reasonable party in the dispute by obfuscating undeniable evidence demonstrating their long history of terror, extremism, and rejectionism.
Contrary to Robert Fisk’s claim, Yasser Arafat was offered was a contiguous state encompassing Gaza, east Jerusalem and considerably more than 90 percent of the West Bank. And, it’s not the “American media” making this “claim”. It’s three of the principle players during negotiations – Bill Clinton, his chief peace negotiator Dennis Ross and Martin Indyk, then the US Ambassador to Israel.
If foreign journalists covering the region held Palestinian leaders to the same level of critical scrutiny that they consistently hold Israeli leaders to, the ten seconds of Abbas addressing the UN would cause nothing less than a media storm – with reports, analyses and commentaries informing readers that Abbas’s claim that Palestinians “are committed to fostering a culture of peace and a rejection of violence” is simply the opposite of the truth.
Following communication with UK Media Watch, editors at the Evening Standard revised the headline and text to make it clear that the incident on Israel’s northern border last week was started by an Iranian drone that penetrated Israeli air space.
Despite the fact that Burke acknowledges that “the emergence of terrorism as we know it today” begun “in the second half of the 19th century”, his historical overview of modern terror somehow manages to avoid any mention of Palestinian attacks against Jews in Israeli cities, or Palestinian attacks on Jewish targets in Western cities.
Indy’s former Jerusalem reporter: Gaza tunnels are a testament to Palestinian “hard work and ingenuity”
Macintyre, the Indy’s former Jerusalem correspondent, said that Hamas were “a relatively pragmatic Islamist regime”, suggested Gazans are free to criticise the regime, and that the terror group’s building of tunnels was “testament to their hard work and ingenuity”.
Contrary to what Rehman and countless other Guardian contributors and journalist have alleged, BDS is not a ‘progressive’ civil rights movement, but represents quite the opposite: a regressive campaign by radical activists, all of whom share an unhealthy fixation on the ‘sins’ committed by a historically oppressed minority, and some of whom openly seek to turn back the clock on Jewish civil rights by denying Jews, and only Jews, the right to self-determination and freedom