Uncategorized

How We Know The Media Hates Israel

Here’s an AP story that ran this morning:

Car Explosion Rocks Gaza City

GAZA CITY, Gaza Strip (AP) – A car exploded in northern Gaza City on Wednesday, Palestinian officials and witnesses said.

Witnesses said the occupants of the automobile had survived the blast. It was unclear who was traveling inside.

During four years of fighting, Israel has carried out numerous airstrikes aimed at Palestinian militants. The Israeli army declined to comment.

07/07/04 06:22 EDT

Ok, let’s get this straight… Car bomb in Gaza? No leads? No evidence? Israel did it. WTF?!

19 thoughts on “How We Know The Media Hates Israel

  1. Asaf, leave mobi alone! Its rare for him and I to agree:)
    While this may not be proof that they “hate” israel, it is a good example of how the media reports unfairly about israel.

  2. Regarding the same story: http://tinyurl.com/2qvco
    (This is Reuters)
    “An explosion ripped through the engine of a car in Gaza on Wednesday in what Palestinian officials said was a Israeli missle strike but which television footage indicated may have been a mechanical fault.
    […]
    There was no sign of a missle impact such as the missle fragments or shrapnel holes usually found on the scene of helicopter attack.
    Israeli security sources said they were checking the incident but had no immediate information about any new missle strike against Palestinian militants in Gaza.”

  3. Of course it’s going to be Israel’s fault. Israel bears all the responsibility for every circumstance in the Middle East conflict….
    But seriously, I must repeat it again. There is no rhetorical baseline for discussion on the Israel-Arab conflict. This is why when Howard Dean declared the need for “even-handedness” during the Democratic primary campaign, so many interested parties could shamelessly seize the opportunity to seek clarification on their own terms. What’s “occupied”? Depending on who you ask, it could be Ramallah or Petah Tikva.
    Unless and until Jewish national self-determination in Israel is a recognized fact of life in the realm of human rights, and the rhetoric that equates Israel and Zionism with apartheid and racism is unequivocally rejected, there won’t be any baseline to the discussion. The Israeli-Arab conflict will continue to be a marathon proxie war for cynical third parties: every settlement will be seen as necessary for security while every protest will be considered terrorism; and every genuine Israeli response to real terrorist attacks will be considered racist aggression while every rejectionist policy of the Arab establishment that enables Palestinian terror will be considered an act of resistance.

  4. Reality check.
    AP is notorious for altering stories, and sending very limited info out over the wire. Reuters less so. AP will often issue two or more stories on the same event, with differing perspectives, usually as the day goes on. It really depends upon the writers.
    Note the contrast from the one Mo posted to the one here, which went out on the wire about six hours later (EST):
    (07-07) 03:37 PDT GAZA CITY, Gaza Strip (AP) —
    A large explosion went off near a car traveling in northern Gaza City on Wednesday, lightly wounding three bystanders, Palestinian hospital officials said.
    Palestinian security officials said the cause of the blast was unknown. The occupants of the vehicle also were not immediately known.
    Medical officials said the wounded included a 62-year-old woman, a 5-year-old boy and a 35-year-old man.
    During four years of fighting, Israel has carried out numerous airstrikes aimed at Palestinian militants. But witnesses said there were no signs that Israel had attacked the vehicle.
    The army declined to comment.
    Generally, first posts are not very good. That’s a given.
    Here’s another:
    Gaza City, Gaza Strip-AP — Palestinian officials say a large explosion went off near a car traveling in northern Gaza City today.
    They say three people were slightly injured, including a woman in her 60s and a young boy. They apparently weren’t in the vehicle.
    It’s not known what caused the blast or who was in the car.
    No comment from the Israeli army, which has targeted cars in the past carrying suspected militants in the area.
    In this case, the most detailed story went out over Reuter’s first, at 7:42AM (EST) It read as follows:
    GAZA (Reuters) – An explosion ripped through the engine of a car in Gaza on Wednesday in what Palestinian officials said was a Israeli missile strike but which television footage indicated may have been a mechanical fault.
    Palestinian medics and officials said the explosion in a white Mercedes in the Zeitoun neighborhood of Gaza City was caused by a missile hit like those that have killed wanted Palestinian militant leaders in the past.
    But people nearby said later they did not see the actual incident and surmised it was a missile strike because they heard Israeli aircraft flying overhead shortly before the explosion. Israeli warplanes and helicopters often fly over the Gaza Strip.
    Television footage showed an oil spill extending about 30 meters (yards) behind the vehicle. The explosion, which injured three bystanders, was confined to the vehicle’s engine and the windshield was intact.
    There was no sign of a missile impact such as the missile fragments or shrapnel holes usually found on the scene of helicopter attacks.
    Israeli security sources said they were checking the incident but had no immediate information about any new missile strike against Palestinian militants in Gaza.
    “We heard an explosion and we rushed to the streets and saw passengers of the car running away,” one local witness said.
    The Israeli army has stepped up operations in the Gaza Strip after rockets fired from an area north of Gaza City killed a three-year-old boy and a man outside a kindergarten in the Israeli town of Sderot at the end of June.
    The filing times have been changed, but Reuter’s has been actively updating the story, and AP has simply been reporting what Reuters is writing. This isn’t unusual.
    Don’t be so eager to jump on info from the AP, ever.
    Especially if there is no biline. Cause, as the Reuters wire shows, the AP stories were obviously leaving out info, which is standard until they get their own info. And, fyi, AP in Isreal isn’t as on top of it as Reuters, which has a full staff in Tel Aviv and in the OC. AP does not.

  5. And, before anyone gets their panties in a twist, I’m not saying that PEOPLE in the media aren’t anti-Isreal. (Saying the media has anti-Israel bias is just a wee bit over general don’t ya think?) It’s just that there’s more to it than meets the eye sometimes…

  6. The media isn’t made up of journalists anymore who want to report the who, what, where, why, and how of events. The current generation of media folks is made up of ‘bright young minds’ who want to make the world better through ‘reporting’.
    Generalizing? Yeah.

  7. If a car bomb goes off in Israel, and the media immediately assumes it was set by an Arab, none of you would raise an eyebrow. Figuring out who has a motive is one of the fundamentals of police investigatory work.
    So why the double standard?
    The Israeli government has used bombs hidden in telephones, letter bombs, and even car bombs to kill people many times.
    In the early 1970s, prominent members of Palestinian organizations were killed in rocket attacks and car bomb explosions in Lebanon.
    In the 1970s and 1980s, Israel’s government assassinated dozens of Palestinian leaders throughout Europe and in several Arab capitals. They did so utilizing a variety of different methods: commando raids, gangland-style undercover hit teams and letter and car bombings.

  8. Babylonian,
    I’d have to disagree. A few weeks back, when the mobsters blew up the restaurant, it was suspected that it was a Palestinian, but from the beginning there was doubt. When it turned out not to be, the real story was widely printed. Maybe that will happen, but I doubt it.

  9. Well, see, you’re both right. The thing is, you have to remember that media is people. And, the reasons that a story gets biased can be complicated. Information gathering on a story, especially one in which the concerned sides are extremely polarized, and those sides are also actively using disinfo and intimidation tactics… it’s gets messy. I’m not making excuses. I’m just saying, it’s really important to find your own truth amongst the untruths. Usually, initial reports are riddled with inaccuracy. Later reports will have more info, unless the topic is intercepted by disinfo. Which happens all the time. That’s why so much of the truly investigative reporting happens after the fact, months and years later. Well, one of the reasons…
    People lie. And, they lie a lot. (Gasp!)

  10. If a car bomb goes off in Israel, and the media immediately assumes it was set by an Arab, none of you would raise an eyebrow. Figuring out who has a motive is one of the fundamentals of police investigatory work. So why the double standard?
    Silly me: and I thought there wasn’t supposed to be a double standard! Here’s an idea: when there’s a bombing, and the journalist has no clue as to who was responsible, they should carefully label conjecture as conjecture — whether in Israel or in the Palestinian territories.
    Information gathering on a story, especially one in which the concerned sides are extremely polarized, and those sides are also actively using disinfo and intimidation tactics… it’s gets messy. Yes. The job of the journalist is to make sure that they acknowledge the parts that were, er, speculation, and which actually based on the story at hand.
    Usually, initial reports are riddled with inaccuracy. Later reports will have more info Hence the complaint. What wires should be doing: initial reports are riddled with gaps. Later reports will have more info. Making stuff up isn’t really their prerogative. Yes, the relevant correspondents (Ibrahim Barzak of AP, Nidal Mughrabi of Reuters) are under pressure from their editors to say something meaningful, and of the PA to say the right thing. So when that leads to fuck ups, calling them on it is the right thing to do.

  11. Do you think they are under any pressure from Isreali authorities? Do you mean: do I think that Ibrahim Barzak and Nidal al-Mughrabi are under pressure from Israeli authorities to make sure that their reports toe the government line?
    If so: then, no, not the kind of pressure and immediate threats of physical violence with which the PA confronts them. The fascist and authoritarian nature of the PA is not, I thought, being debated here. Unless I’ve missed something.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

The reCAPTCHA verification period has expired. Please reload the page.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.