PokornyPundit

Your source for opinion on news, politics, science, religion, media, and culture

Sunday, March 13, 2005

Palestinian bias in the media

After receiving an email from someone critiquing my previous post about Hamas and its participation in mainstream politics, I felt it was necessary, for the sake of fairness, to point out that sources like the BBC have been repeatedly found to be bias and inaccurate in favor of the Palestinians. Although I respect the outlet as a fairly reputable source for international news, I was perhaps wrong to include excerpts from it on such a touchy subject as the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The purpose of my previous post, I suppose, was to find the "bright side" of Hamas' statement, as reported by CNN. However, I did not mean in any way to show favor towards the cause of Hamas, which I find to be very extremist and bigoted in nature.

Just to emphasize my point, I would like to share a couple of links that may be of interest to those wishing to get the straight scoop about some of the things going on in Israel.

Honestreporting.com
is a hotbed of stories of bias in the Western media against Israel. Within that site, for example, there are a number of instances where the French and British media, the AFP and BBC respectively, have committed blatant errors in their reporting that could be taken as a sign of bias. Here is an interesting excerpt from the site:

On Feb. 14, a Palestinian in Hebron tried to stab an IDF soldier, but was shot and killed before he could do so.

Agence France-Presse (AFP) released this photo (at left) of the scene, with the following caption:

An Israeli soldier walks next to the body of a Palestinian who was shot dead by Israeli troops close to the Tomb of the Patriarchs in Hebron. Israel handed over the remains of 15 militants shot dead by the army during attempted attacks in the Gaza Strip as part of a series of goodwill gestures towards the Palestinians.

The AFP caption omits the essential context of this scene ― the pictured man had attempted to stab the IDF soldier, who then shot in self-defense. The effect is to suggest that the IDF killed the Palestinian man for no reason.

The photo really gives the effect that the Palestinian that was shot was indeed a victim of a senseless murder, as opposed to an act of self-defense by the IDF soldier.

Another major source of news that I have been made aware of is the Jerusalem Post. Although considered liberal by most Israelis, it could probably be passed off as conservative by mainstream Western media standards. Nevertheless, I will try to include a broader range of sources in further posts so as to maintain as accurate and objective an atmosphere as I can on this blog.

3 Comments:

  • At 1:08 PM, Blogger Remz Pokorny said…

    To answer your questions, yes, I do believe that the wall is actually a good thing for the time being. I don't think it should be permenant, but it is sort of letting the two sides "cool off" by seperating them from each other while the peace process slowly gets going. Settlements are a tough issue but I think Sharon is doing the right thing to pull back in some areas despite pressure from the right. It is showing that the Israelis do have some common sense about them in this process. A Palestinian state...sure why not? That way if there is an attack on Israel from a Palestinian militant, Israel could better justify a retaliation as defense of its state. But before a state can be established, the Palestinians need to set up a solid internal infrastructure, which has been severly damaged over the years by the Arafat regime (and one could argue the Israelis). Nonetheless, it is also important to note that Arafat was given a very enticing offer by Prime Minister Barak in 1999 (or was it 2000?) at Camp David for a state (I think it included like 98 % of the West Bank and East Jerusalem as a capital) but the Palestinian camp walked away from it...very sad indeed. On the subject of Bush's support, no, I don't see how it could be another attempt to set up a "pupper regime." The Palestinians elected Abbas fair and square. They had a ballot with numerous candidates running for office. I have not seen any evidence of tampering by the US or any other foreign power (I believe a UN election commission oversaw the process and assured people it was fair by their standards). Let's just face it, the Arab world wants change. Of course the US may be interested in oil but I find it hard to believe that it is the real motive here. It definitely might be a factor but I think the Bush administration is smart enough to realize that we're not going to win this war on terror unless and until the Arab world gets a taste of true freedom. And that's currently what they are getting.

     
  • At 4:44 PM, Blogger Robert Taylor said…

    I think it's wrong to label the BBC as biased in anything. I would say they are the least biased off all the media's I know. As opposed to listening to American media which is run by Jews.

     
  • At 7:44 PM, Blogger Remz Pokorny said…

    dude you gotta check out some of those links in the post...some of the stuff that the BBC or the French media reports is pretty inaccurate, there really isn't any other way around the bias. that is not to say conservative groups don't do the same thing, but i'm just putting it out there.

     

Post a Comment

<< Home