Subject:
|
Re: The skinny on Jenin, the European Press
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Mon, 27 May 2002 10:28:55 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
395 times
|
| |
|
|
> Sure, it was the excuse given for such a blunder, but it wasn't the cause. The
> cause was irresponsible "journalism". What ever happened to the idea that if
> you can't get the facts straight, don't print the story? Now it's, if you
> can't get the facts that support your idealogy, make them up to advance it.
John,
You really are a worry. I wish I could just dismiss all the news I dislike
as being part of some sort of conspiracy. Life would be so much easier!
The facts were:
1. Heavy gunfire coming form Jenin
2. Israel, a nation with an appalling human rights record, moved tanks into
an urban area in an attempt to stop suicide bombings.
3. The Israelis allowed no medical aid in or out for civilians.
4. No journalists were allowed into the area.
5. The Israeli PM is personally responsible for the murder of innocent women
and children in the past.
6. The Israeli PM imposes a news blackout.
7. Palestinians claim a "massacre" is underway.
Points 1-7 were reported. You have a problem with No 7? Why? Because of the
bias of the Media! You claim it is systematically Anti-Israeli... but yet
cannot support this in any substantive way.
You need to read this:
Missing in action
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,4273,4394251,00.html
2 Examples of bias:
"For example, on October 10 2000 it was reported that Arab residents of Tel
Aviv had been chased and stabbed. This was described on ITN as "angry Jews
looking for Arab victims". In the Guardian these events were described as a
pogrom. The reports on television news were extremely brief but two days
later when two Israeli soldiers were killed by a crowd of Palestinians there
was very extensive coverage and the words "lynching" and "lynch mob" were
very widely used. This difference in the use of language is noteworthy. This
is especially so since in this period, at the beginning of the intifada,
nearly 10 times as many Palestinians had been killed as Israelis."
"There is a second, perhaps more crucial reason why the TV newsrooms do not
dwell on the history and origins of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. This
is that to explain these or to refer to them as underlying the violence
could be very controversial. Israel is closely allied to the United States
and there are very strong pro-Israel lobbies in the US and to some extent in
Britain. It is clear that a lack of discussion of the origins of the
conflict and of the controversial aspects of the occupation would operate in
favour of Israel."
Scott A
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: The skinny on Jenin, the European Press
|
| (...) Correct:-) You know Chris, they don't call the right "right" for nothing;-) (...) Which leads to the question, why do "studies" at all? Seems to me that their purpose is to influence popular opinion by their results and advance agendas, (...) (22 years ago, 25-May-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
43 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
