Re: Myth, Fact - the al-Dura Affair - Western News Media Complicity?
[ Follow-Ups ]
[ Post Followup ]
[ Public Message Forum ]
Posted by Bill Narvey on 10:45:40 2005/09/08
In Reply to:
Myth, Fact, and the al-Dura Affair posted by Nidra Poller
Nidra Poller's article, Myth, Fact, and the al-Dura Affair brings together snippets of leaked information over the years that puts the initial story aired in great doubt.
Where was the American/Canadian media from the outset that proclaim they dig for the facts and the truth, letting the cards fall where they may?
Surely, questions immediately arose from the initial report by France's F2 which was dramatically narrated by France-2's Jerusalem correspondent.
Let's say that the initial report was so shocking, that it numbed the media's mind and no thought was given to checking the facts. Surely, Israel's quick, imprudent and contrite apology before it even knew the facts, contributed to the initial acceptance of the report.
The media has had plenty of time to get over its initial shock and to start questioning, especially in light of the questions and doubts that slowly began emerging about the veracity of the entire story.
To my recollection, those questions, doubts and new facts have been intermittently commented on in some magazine articles and books. These publications however, do not reach the public at large as does the TV/Radio media, which the vast majority of the public are tuned into.
It is the TV/Radio broadcast media which gave credence to the news stories it broadcast about this al-Dura matter, as it has to so many other anti-Israel news bits initially coming from dubious Palestinian/pro-Palestinian or anti-Israel news sources.
If the TV/Radio does ever broadcast a correction in respect of falsified stories that emanated from anti-Israel propagandists of any stripe, it usually makes as much an impression on the public, if it reaches the public's attention at all as when the print media publish a correction to a front page story somewhere in the back pages of their paper.
So why did Western media not keep on top of the Al-Dura story as the story started to unravel?
In the case of the Palestinian claim that the Israelis had massacred 5,000 Palestinians in Jenin and had destroyed the city, I recall the CNN, CBS and I think CBC televised news reports.
The media always televised their reporter against the background of a part of Jenin that had suffered visible damage. The reports, careful to give equal time in their brief news snippets to the Palestinian accusations and Israeli denials, never reported that the background damaged buildings of Jenin, represented, I believe the ultimate truth being that only about 10% of Jenin had suffered any property damage in the Israeli operation to apprehend the terrorists known to be there.
So in these reports of Jenin, the media well knew that Jenin had not suffered heavy damage all over, but still, by how they set up their cameras for their news reports, continued to give the impression that the Palestinian accusations that the Media repeated without other comment, were true.
The media also well knew that Jenin played host, willingly (and perhaps in some cases unwillingly) to a large number of Palestinian terrorists who used Jenin as their base from which to launch their terrorist actions.
The media's reports I recall said, that Israel claimed that such was the case, but the Media that knew it was in fact the case, did not mention that or at least not in any memorable way.
As more and more Palestinian accusations were shown to be lies, the media did little to report on that.
So, why did the media wittingly contribute to the veracity of the false Palestinian accusations
that 5,000 Palestinians had been indiscriminately massacred and the city of Jenin devastated?
As the Israeli denials emerged more and more as being true and the Palestinian accusations were lies, the media showed little interest in the pursuit and reporting of that truth. Perhaps the initial story over time lost its impact, or was there some other reason to avoid reporting the truth?
Instead the media turned to reporting on the world and U.N. pressure that Israel allow the U.N. to investigate and Israel's apparent unreasonableness in refusing to allow that.
The media already knew that the Palestinian accusations of death and destruction were false or at least questionable.
Instead the media focussed on the so called 'reasonable request' of the world and the U.N. that Israel submit itself to investigation and further gave the public the impression by repeating without comment statements by many that Israel's refusal strongly suggested that Israel was trying to hide the truth.
So why did the media that knew and discovered more in time that the Palestinian accusations were questionable and in many instances plainly untrue, not report that and instead continue to lend credence to the Palestinian accusations of Israeli wrongs?
Many TV broadcast media have been accused of having and anti-Israel bias. In my view it is fair to conclude that, just from the several observations I have made.
Perhaps the questions I have raised can be reasonably answered without concluding the Media I have mentionedhave an anti-Israel bias. At this moment however, I just cannot figure out what that other explanation is.
........
Follow Ups:
Post a Followup
[ Follow Ups ]
[ Post Followup ]
[ Public Message Forum ]