Richard Landes: Middle east pack journalism: Everybody agrees
One of the journalist’s favorite responses to being criticized for bias is: “As long as we anger each side equally, we’re doing something right.” It’s a favorite among journalists covering the conflict between Israel and its neighbors. “We’re on the right track because both sides complain.” And sure enough, there’s ample literature “on both sides” complaining that the press favors “the other side.” After all, as one New York Times correspondent puts it, it’s all about “dueling narratives” in a “land of few facts.”David Collier: Conflation – Labour Party antisemitism is in the details and the media
In reality, however, this “both sides complain” meme has operated as a fig leaf concealing just how far off the rails the mainstream news media have gone when it comes to reporting from the Middle East. In fact, journalists have, over the past two decades, actually produced an inversion of reality: not only do “facts” reported by Israelis get turned into an Israeli “narrative,” but Palestinian narratives get reported as facts.
For example, journalists, basing themselves on casualty figures provided by Hamas-run institutions, using footage at the hospital shot under Hamas’ watchful eye, repeat the jihadi (and UN, and NGO) narrative that “the vast... overwhelming majority of victims are civilians.”
Some of this comes from pure intimidation. In 2014, during Operation Protective Edge, Hamas intimidation of journalists became so extensive that the Foreign Press Office, normally much quicker to denounce Israeli intimidation than Palestinian, issued a protest against Hamas’ behavior.
In response, the New York Times correspondent tweeted: “Every reporter I’ve met who was in Gaza during war says this Israeli/now FPA narrative of Hamas harassment is nonsense.”
In 119 characters, she dismissed ample empirical evidence and credible testimony of Hamas intimidation as an “Israeli narrative,” now also adhered to by the FPA, and instead gave us the Palestinian narrative as news.
In other words, the real nonsense comes across as the reporter’s voice, and the accurate assessment comes across as Israeli narrative nonsense.
So consistently did the media pass on this narrative that Hamas actually based its war strategy on their cooperation. As Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh gloated in 2014, Palestinian sources “constituted the river from which the global media quenched its thirst for information about what was happening.”
An insult to British JewsLabour can’t tackle anti-Semitism under Corbyn
It is a direct insult to the 99.998%, 99.98%, 99.8% or 98% of the Jewish population who are not being represented. More importantly, it is to spit in the face of the 93%+ of Jews who actively disagree with the views of this small cult, and it gives an infusion of adrenaline to antisemites desperate for legitimate cover.
This cult are eerily similar to the Russian communist Yevsektsiya, an arm of the Russian propaganda, who set out to ‘destroy traditional Jewish life’. So what steps have the BBC, Sky, the Guardian and James O’Brien taken to ensure that they are not acting as mouthpieces for such a group? Have they done anything? Or is spirited debate ALWAYS WELCOME when it comes to racism? Will they place far-right people on a chair in their studio, every time there is a victim of anti-black racism or anti-Muslim hatred? How would that be received?
The problem of course is fueled by the deliberate confusion created in conflation. All it takes is one person, one, in a studio, media department, union, school, council session or strategy meeting, to utter the words that ‘anti-Zionism is not the same as antisemitism’, and we are back on that slippery slope. These have become empty terms used by people who do not understand them, that have allowed anti-Jewish racism to become normalised in our society. This mantra is of course promoted and propagated by groups like JVL who benefit for all the confusion they manage to create.
In any normal situation, society would rely on the victims themselves to define what they are and what they see as racism. With Jews that simply is not happening. Instead Jews are being accused of subverting democracy. Haven’t we all been down this road before? Surely now #enoughisenough
The Labour Party brings to mind any number of Yiddish expressions — most of them involving the performance of lavatorial functions — but none more so than the proverb Der mentsh trakht un Got lakht. Man plans and God laughs.
The Almighty’s black humour is surely at work in the resignation of Christine Shawcroft, chair of the Labour Party disputes panel. The woman responsible for rooting out anti-Semitism has been caught defending a council candidate accused of posting Holocaust-denying content on social media. In a leaked internal email, Shawcroft called for Peterborough’s Alan Bull to be reinstated after suspension for ‘a Facebook post taken completely out of context and alleged to show anti-Semitism’. One of Bull’s alleged posts read ‘International Red Cross report confirms the Holocaust of six million Jews is a hoax’ and a link to a neo-fascist website, Renegade Tribune. Bull insists screenshots of his Facebook page have been doctored. The Renegade Tribune has reported his plight under the headline: ‘UK Labour Candidate Shared Holohoax Article from Renegade Tribune, Suspended by Party’.
Shawcroft was put in charge of the disputes panel just 71 days ago, after the far-left ousted Ann Black, who is herself a left-winger but had seemingly displeased her comrades with her handling of membership rules and suspensions for, among other things, anti-Semitism. Her resignation, and the fact it came about via the leaking of an email sent only to fellow far-leftists, is being spun as proof that there is now an appetite among some Corbynistas for tackling Labour anti-Semitism. Undoubtedly, they are a ruthless, power-hungry bunch who make New Labour look positively unambitious by comparison. They would surely say or do or feign anything to get into Downing Street. Asked on Sky News this morning, John McDonnell would not say whether Shawcroft should also recuse herself from her NEC seat. (He later said she shouldn’t step down).
I hate to be a pain but it’s been three days now. Three days since Jeremy Corbyn acknowledged ‘pockets of anti-Semitism’ in the Labour Party and pledged himself as a ‘militant opponent’ of Jew-hatred. What has happened since then? Apart from Labour’s anti-anti-Semitism chief quitting after defending an accused anti-Semite, the answer seems to be nothing much. Richard Angell, head of the centrist pressure group Progress, has suggested a programme of actions to take on Labour anti-Semitism. Wes Streeting and John Mann have done likewise. Indeed, there seem to be more plans for ridding Labour of Jew-hatred than there are figures at the top of the party with any interest in or motivation to adopt them.