The Tool That Is Twitter

In my Media Comment columns at the Jerusalem Post, wrttten conjointly with Eli Pollak, we have highlighted an aspect of Twitter that we see as harmful to objective and fair journalism which is the way it leads journalists to become personal and then strident and nasty in their conversation which spills over back into their reporting.

In this June 8 NYTimes article, there is revealed another aspect, one in which the reporter feels obliged, because of the mass feedback that Twitter generates in an intoxicating fashion, to respond to what his/her audience wants to hear:

The central vein for reporters, producers, activists and a vast national audience was Twitter, which had already begun subtly shifting the power dynamic innews. It steered coverage. When John Eligon of The Times published a largely sympathetic profile of Mr. Brown that described him as “no angel,” it setoff outrage on Twitter as a symbol of a style of journalism that seemed too ready to explain away police violence. “They had a point” about the phrase, Mr. Eligon recalled last week. Twitter “did make it feel like you’re more accountable to a broader audience and a more diverse audience.”The platform also gave the younger reporters “freedom to establish their own stilts in ways we didn’t have without someone handing us the keys,” said Trymaine Lee, then 35 and reporting for MSNBC. “Before you’re at the whim of the newsroom,’’ said Mr. Lee. Buton Twitter, the young journalists received “positive reinforcement,they’re getting thousands and thousands of people saying, ‘Yes, we do like that.’”

To borrow radical progressive political terminology, this is media weaponizing in support not of social or economic or political change and improvement but in support of revolution while jettisoning any normative ethical professionalism.

^

I Was Accused of Trolling

On Wednesday, I was accused of 'trolling' which appears to be a social media platform crime, a charge usually reserved for someone doing basically the same thing you are doing but from a different political viewpoint.

I noticed that Avi Scharf, editor of the English-language edition of Haaretz, had tweeted (by the way, you can learn so much following Israeli journalists on their Twitter feeds where they shed any modicum of objectivity or even fairness and lash out at each other, sometimes sarcastically but most times viciously) a tweet that read:

"Bibi is now channeling Kahane, whose party is projected to get 4 seats in the next Knesset"

and I retweeted that and added in commentary:

"Example how Haaretz English outdoes even the Hebrew edition at times is slanting, shaping, spinning, managing the news." 

Anyone who follows the English edition of Haaretz, and I suggest you check CAMERA's site as well as it's Israeli partner, Presspectiva, if you read Hebrew, knows that my assertion is not incorrect.  For five years I was Director of Israel Media's Watch and we also did studies, thanks to IMRA's Aaron Lerner's father, Dr. Joseph Lerner, that showed a particular venomous approach to the news if it dealt with issues of a right-wing/nationalist character from the period of the late David ("rape Israel") Landau and on to his successors. 

For example, recently they slyly "misconstrued" Netanyahu's Hebrew (here), intimating he was declaring 'Arabs want to annihilate us all' when he said "the Arabs who desire to kill us all", indicating a specific group.

For measure, I added

"If the Supreme Court allowed them to run, ipso facto they are not racist nor Kahanist"

After all, if the Left holds Israel’s High Court of Justice is esteem, their decision should be respected. But it seems that is true only if the court decides according to their world-view.

Scharf then responded

"You're full of crap. this is my personal tweet - not Haaretz English/Hebrew edition. Though it's def poss Haaretz editorial will have a say as well."

Even ignoring the lashing out and invective, I would fully accept that if his Tweeter bio had included a normative alert such as "my tweets are my personal opinion" or something similar that I would be in the wrong.

Scharf followed up with a clip of Netanyahu saying what he had quoted and added

And here's your supreme leader, calling out - IN ENGLISH - against elected Arab leaders - in the only democracy in the Middle East

I rejoined, if a bit sharply:

Using "supreme" only confirms my presumption that your journalism ethics course mark was F. Or that you run an ideological gazette rather than a newspaper. Next time, answer the point I made?

After all, I pointed out something quite a factual and logical: if the Supreme Court permitted Otzma Yehudit to participate in the democratic process of elections, they are, so to say, kosher. One may not like that. One can suggest no one vote for them. In fact, he was doing exactly what he was railing against what Netanyahu was doing, that is, attacking another political party. And in sharp and strident language.

His comeback?

you're a troll. feel free to unfollow

There it was. I am a troll. No argument about the rather nonsensical logic he was employing. Or the avoiding of countering my points. A simple slapdown and off he goes. I am unworthy. Bothersome.

The standards of newspaper editors these days.

^

The Media and Israel - 1936

Paying close attention to the media by the Revisionist Movement, how the London Times treats the background of events in then Mandate Palestine:

Found at the Jabotinsky Institute archives.

And the response:

^

Quotable Words

I've always believed that who a reporter votes for, what religion they are, who they love, should not be something they have to discuss publicly. As long as a journalist shows fairness and honesty in his or her work, their private life shouldn't matter.

Anderson Cooper

But the subjects he and his colleagues cover shall have no private life.

^

The Halacha Adapts to Media Needs

Captured on film, Arabs igniting fires near Yitzher:




The people encircled in orange are not Jews.

As suggested by Chanie Luz, the inderdict response security team of Yitzhar brought along, this time, a camera and caught the fires being set by Arabs.  It was sanctioned by Rabbi Dudi Dudkevitch and in Hebrew on him.

More info.

Chanie on Facebook.

----------------

Here is a translated section of Chanie's article:

The media aligns with the image

Again, B'tselem is the big story: The Walla site distributed only the Arab version story all day Saturday. On Sunday, major news sites like Channel 2 News distributed the edited film of B'tselem without any statement or question. Maariv chose to print on Monday, a day and a half after the event itself, a headline announcing that "the settlers fired on Palestinians - Israeli soldiers watched from the side."
  One of them saw fit to describe the fires around, or highlight what you see clearly in photographs: the pictures...Instead of asking why the soldiers did not stop the stone throwing directed at civilians of Yitzhar - the headlines were crying out that the IDF did not stop firing on "Palestinians".  All except channel 10, where the reporter Roy Sharon talks about fires, no one else was trying to describe the full story of what happened in Yitzhar.
Placing a clip on as serious an outlet as Channel 2, without any context, and playing the other side's story - puts into question the journalistic professionalism of news editors at the site.

Long-term monitoring of the media reveals apparently a special 'affinity' reserved for Yizhar: This community is one that is perfectly legitimate to hate. The Army Radio announcer was allowed to say, baldly, it was a better a soldier had shot the residents.
...Israeli newspapers need have to check their own approach to human rights of residents of Yizhar and especially their basic right to life.  
The camera is a weapon

But the additional conclusion that perhaps more cardinal directed inward, toward the Rabbis: Jewish law ruling regarding photography on Saturday must take into account that the strength of the weapon clips surpasses all other damages: using tendentious and edited videos - makes it easy to incite against Jews, against Israel and against Israeli soldiers. The result is anti-Semitism around the world, including boycotts and economic persecution and murder stemming from this the hatred of Israel.  With the visual incitement, the IDF has become a defensive army, where soldiers must absorb spitting, cursing, stones and violence without responding. Too many soldiers were killed due to unreasonable commands that take into account the damage to the image in the media.
With media propaganda, many Jews have legal scars, and abandoned Jewish settlers are bled. What is necessary is that Rabbis need give an the opinion that professional photography be permited on the Shabbat just as defensive weapons are allowed on the Shabbaty. Not only the camera of security officers, but by specially trained photographers, for example, the Tazpit organization.

If for the business of straw and hay the Sabbath may be desecrated, I think the blood libels post - modern - the more so.

I do not pretend to rule, for their are greater scholars than I, but in matters of communication I do presume to say that I understand much.

I call on rabbis to contemplate and discuss and make a sound brave decision, and prevent the damage the media and the image cause.

Channie and I:

^

Someone Keeping Track of Jodi Ruderon's Stories?

These are the two latest stories in the New York Times by the new Jerusalem Bureau Chief, Jodi Ruderon:

Mahmoud Abbas Says Israel Is Hindering West Bank Security
By JODI RUDOREN
President Mahmoud Abbas of the Palestinian Authority said Israel was withholding authorized weapons, and he expressed worries about a widespread prison hunger strike.
Full Story:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/13/world/middleeast/palestinians-and-israelis-in-talks-to-end-hunger-strike.html?emc=tnt&tntemail1=y

and

Man Arrested in Shooting in West Bank
By JODI RUDOREN and KHALED ABU AKER
Palestinian Authority officials say the suspect is the brother of a man killed in a clash with the Palestinian police about a month before the shooting.
Full Story:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/13/world/middleeast/palestinian-officials-arrest-man-in-shooting-at-home-of-jenin-governor.html?emc=tnt&tntemail1=y

Do you think someone has put two-and-two together and come to the realisation that there are too many guns in the PA as is?  And being used for all the wrong reasons?

Is anyone keepng track and count of how many stories Jodi is publishing on the PA and how many on Israel?  How many are representing a plurality of opinion?

^

Sex, Smoke and the BBC

I just can't wait for the Israeli version*.

Never think of the BBC as staid:-

Tales of stars having sex on work premises, strong 'herbal smells' wafting down corridors and presenters appearing in front of the camera 'stoned out of their minds', are all set to feature in a revealing documentary about BBC Television Centre. According to a new BBC4 documentary, 'Lights! Camera! Action! Tales of Television Centre' – some Play School presenters even went in front of the camera after smoking "the biggest joint you've ever seen".

Presenter Johnny Ball told the documentary team that two of his co-stars shot a nativity scene for children's TV show Play School while stoned..."They were absolutely stoned out of their minds. So when we recorded, who cocked his lines up? Me."

...there were complaints about musicians who "didn't smoke ordinary cigarettes" and said Sir David - then BBC2 controller - complained about the "herbal smell" in the corridor...The programme also reveals what went on in some of the stars' dressing rooms, with former Doctor Who actress Katy Manning, who played Jo Grant, said: "People were bonking all over the BBC. Everybody was doing it on the premises."

____________
*

In a reflection on her days at the old Kol Israel studio at downtown Jerusalem's Heleni Hamlak St., Rivka Michaeli was asked about staff frolics and said "if the double sound doors at the studios could talk, they'd reveal how much seed was spilled between them."

Ha-Ha-Haaretz Loses - Again

Despite a massive and intensive media campaign to oppose any military action by Israel to solve the threat from Iran, it has had to publicize that

Poll: Most Jewish Israelis say Iran strike less risky than nuclear threat

Most of those polled (60 percent) agreed that only military action could stop Iran's nuclear program.

A detail:

The poll, conducted by Prof. Camil Fuchs for the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, showed that 65 percent of those asked agreed with the claim that the price Israel would have to pay for living with the threat of an Iranian bomb would be greater than the price it would pay for attacking Iran's nuclear facilities. Only 26 percent disagreed with this claim, with nine percent saying they weren't sure.

Can we presume that Haaretz isn't that influential?

^

Israel's Media - It's Own Worst Enemy

From Lilac Sagan's Maariv op-ed (in Hebrew), State anti - Israel wherein she asks: It is time to ask how the Israeli media coverage of the Middle East conflict contributes to the growing anti-Semitism around the world against us - and begin to repair the distorted image

Excerpts:

...The feeling in the Western world is that Israel creates a situation where hatred, and therefore the Jews of the world, is justified. You can not underestimate the contribution of Israeli policy in these tones...[and] since Israel is the only country in which there is a free media, the international media largely fueled by the Israeli press, and let's face it: The picture here is one - sided.

For some reason, our free press chooses to emphasize only the part of Israel in the difficult situation facing the Palestinians, which affects relations with all countries around it. For us, critical journalism means to expose only Israel's crimes.

When did you last read a comprehensive investigation of corruption in the West Bank? The last time you saw an investigation on corruption in government in the West Bank? Palestinians on the education system that teaches hate and does not give legitimacy to Israel's existence? The feats of Hamas in Gaza or on the many terrorist factions whose meaning is not "responsible adult" one with whom we can talk about a comprehensive settlement?

...we emphasize only what's wrong with us, the conduct of the other party is forgettable. From the picture that emerges is difficult for those watching from the outside and does not know the facts to reach a different conclusion, because they have never been exposed...

Without realizing it, our media also lending a hand to the process [of this anti-Semitism and anti-Israel feeling], because it is not aware of the important role in this arena...[its] approach: first, that the Israeli public tires of the one - sided picture, and so despite the media's activities, there is no real impact on the government's mindset. And secondly, that it contributes to the building of a distorted image.

Why the world does not know "who we really are"? If we do not know who we really are, and if we do not care to stress ourselves the profound differences between the Israeli essence barbaric nature of Hamas, for example, will continue to intensify the atmosphere which threatens us and the Jews throughout the world. Every day that passes we increase their legitimacy and erode our own legitimacy.

Israel's own worst enemy.

^

Ha-Ha-Haaretz Example of How To Lead a Story

What caught my eye was the headline in my Google alert:

Palestinian killed after stabbing soldier in West Bank (Ch. 10)

which is from the "Breaking News" box.

And here is the story's lead:

A Palestinian man was shot and thought to have been killed by Israel Defense Forces on Thursday after stabbing a soldier in a West Bank village near Hebron.

The story itself is headlined and sub-headlined so:

IDF soldier moderately hurt after stabbed during West Bank arrest

Soldier returns fire at assailant, killing him; incident takes place in West Bank village south of Hebron while army forces arrested a Palestinian released as part of the Shalit prisoner swap.

Notice how the paper's bias shows through, blatantly?

Now, if I was editor, I would have written:

Arab attempts to kill soldier; shot and killed

or

Arab terrorist stabs soldier; killed by return fire

What would you have written?

---------

UPDATE

Here's Reuters:

Israeli troops kill Palestinian teenager in West Bank

RAMALLAH, West Bank (Reuters) - An Israeli soldier shot dead a Palestinian and wounded another who stabbed him on Thursday, as troops carried out an arrest in the occupied West Bank, a local medical worker and the Israeli army said.

^

The AP Story of Shvut Rachel and Shiloh

I escorted Karin Laub from AP around Shiloh, Shvut Rachel and the outlook from Givat Achiyah.

Here, from the Washington Post:

Excerpts from her story, "Israel legalizes unsanctioned settler enclave", appear below with my italicized comments in brackets []. Unfortuntely, we who are interviewed rarely get a chance to review the story before publication although quotations and additional 'factual' elements usually are run by us for approval.

But I will stress that from the outset her determination was to present a picture of "illegality" while I kept stressing "unauthorized" and referred to the reality all over Israel including kibbutzim whereby the bureacracy is overcome by first building and then all the necessary authorizations are arranged. And in Judea and Samaria, the difficulty is two-fold: not only a lazy and awkward and complex bureaucracy but also simple political considerations or prejudices can hold up legal construction by method of withholding an authorization or a signing-off on plans that are all perfectly in order.

But now, to her story:

SHVUT RACHEL, West Bank (AP) -- Israel has quietly [I would think the media 'noise' last week was heard even at AP's editorial offices]legalized one of the oldest and largest of the unsanctioned [Shvut Rachel was sanctioned and authorized and recognized in 1991 and has been registered as a neighborhood of Shiloh as it sits on land officially and legally zoned as part of Shiloh which was done in the mid-1980s] settler enclaves dotting the West Bank, a step denounced by the Palestinians and Israeli activists as a show of bad faith ahead of talks next week between the Israeli leader and President Barack Obama [actually, the belated authorization was dictated by the Peace New appeal to the High Court of Justice which finally required the Civil Adminsitration and Ministry of Defence to do what they should have done years ago].

The dispute over settlements has confounded [in truth, it is but one of many things confounding negotiations, foremost among them the refusal of the Arabs to come to the table, to accept ther parameters, to agree to security needs, to recognize refuggee resettlement outisde, to stop incitement, etc.] Washington's attempts to revive Israeli-Palestinian negotiations, mostly on hold since 2008. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has refused to stop construction [wait, wasn't there a 10-month moratorium? it is referred to farther below but only as coming from man Israeli spokesperson] and the Palestinians say they won't negotiate while Israel unilaterally determines the borders of their state through settlement-building.

...The stalled talks and dispute over settlements is bound to come up when Netanyahu meets Obama on Monday.

Shvut Rachel, home to 95 Israeli families, was established 21 years ago on a hilltop in the heart of the West Bank [after Arab terrorists killed 2, Rachela Druk and Yitzhak Rofe and wounded others including children, one, Harel Bin-Nun, was to survive but was then killed in 1998 by other terrorist at Yitzhar] - an area Israel would likely have to withdraw from to make way for a Palestinian state. The settlers grabbed the land without government permission [the land was not "grabbed without permission". the land was allotted to Shiloh. True, plans for construction there had not been made but after the murders of Rachela and Yitzhak, a group of Yeshiva students led by Yossi Shuker z"l set up home on the hill a 10-minute walk from my house and within a short time, full government permission was received].

Now that approval seems at hand. A planning committee last week retroactively legalized 115 apartments already built or under construction in Shvut Rachel, according to government officials and the community's acting mayor, Yaakov Moshe Levi. The move apparently resulted from pressure by peace activists to stop construction there.

In its decision, the panel also approved in principle nearly 500 more apartments, though a construction start would require further permits and could be years away, government officials said.

Hagit Ofran of Israel's Peace Now group says this amounts to establishing a new settlement, contrary to pledges by successive governments over the past two decades not to do so. Israel's Defense Ministry rejected that characterization, saying Shvut Rachel is a neighborhood of the nearby government-sanctioned settlement of Shiloh [which, indeed, it is. as I pointed out to Karin, come election time, the voting booth for Shvut Rachel is always located in Shiloh. they are not recognized as an nindependent entity by the Ministry yof the Interior].

Ghassan Khatib...denounced the Shvut Rachel decision as an escalation of Israel's practices.

...half a million Israelis already live on war-won land, [a war the Arabs precipitated and launched. Israel gained the lands which were originally slated to become part of the historic Jewish homeland by the decision of the League of Nations in a defensive military operation] in more than 130 government-sanctioned settlements and some 100 unauthorized outposts [with a population of some 350,000 which is over 10% of the total population, a situation beginning to mirror that of the Arab minority in Israel] set up by settlers who are open about their desire to impede any partition.

...Spokesman Mark Regev insists the current Israeli government "has shown more restraint on the issue of settlements than any previous government," referring to a 10-month construction slowdown in 2010. He reiterated that the fate of settlements must be determined in negotiations [yes, it is a final-status issue] and that Israel is willing to resume talks immediately.

But a visit to the West Bank's heartland suggests that an Israeli withdrawal would be increasingly difficult. Settlers control many hilltops, their communities flourishing with government support, including for unauthorized outposts.

Shvut Rachel and Shiloh [see map below], which also won retroactive approval for some 100 apartments last week, have spawned five more nearby outposts [Achiyah, Keida, Adei-Ad, Esh Kodesh, Givat Harel and Gal Yosef actually. oh, and the retreat called Yishuv HaDa'at]. Settlers operate vineyards [see pictures below] on 3,000 acres that produce more than 50,000 bottles of wine a year, as well as an olive press that produces 12 percent of Israel's domestic olive oil, said New York-born Yisrael Medad, a Shiloh resident.

"We love the land and we build here, and after that we get formalization," the 65-year-old said during a tour of the area Tuesday.

In Shvut Rachel and the area's five other unsanctioned enclaves, the government has lent a hand, even while withholding formal approval. The Housing Ministry under settler patron Ariel Sharon, later Israel's prime minister, built 68 homes in Shvut Rachel just months after it was established, even though it lacked permits, said Moshe Levi, the acting mayor.

The government also provided water, electricity and other services, just as it does for other unauthorized settler enclaves set up since the late 1990s in response to calls by Sharon for settlers to seize the hilltops.

Israel's Defense Ministry denied last week's decision means an outpost has been legalized. It described Shvut Rachel as a neighborhood of Shiloh, home to about 300 families. The two communities are about a half-mile (kilometer) apart, on neighboring hilltops separated by a valley.

"This is not an isolated outpost. This is a neighborhood of Shiloh," a Defense Ministry spokesman said of Shvut Rachel, speaking on condition of anonymity in line with briefing regulations.

Shvut Rachel is part of Shilo's municipal boundaries, Medad said.

However, a 2005 government-commissioned report classified Shvut Rachel as an outpost - as it has with other unauthorized enclaves, even if they were set up within the municipal boundaries of a mother settlement [and that report was specious and ideologically-driven by someone who ran for the Knesset on the estreme left-wing Meretz Party].

Moshe Levi said Shilo and Shvut Rachel have separate budgets and administrations.

Talia Sasson, an Israeli lawyer who wrote the 2005 report on outposts, said she was concerned the Shvut Rachel decision could pave the way for the retroactive legalization of more outposts...

Sharon promised Washington to dismantle outposts built after he took office in March 2001. The Defense Ministry official said three outposts have been removed. The military has also removed mobile homes and other structures in other enclaves, but settlers routinely return to the sites.

Now the Netanyahu government appears to be backing away from Sharon's promise. In January, Netanyahu appointed a three-member committee to review land and legal issues in each outpost.

The panel was told illegal construction on private West Bank land should be removed, and was asked to put in order the planning and zoning status of Israeli construction on public lands, said committee member Alan Baker...Ofran, the settlement monitor, said the recent government decisions have sent a clear message to the settlers: "You build illegally where you want ... and the government of Israel will approve it for you retroactively."

Well, as we know, what is legal can become illegal by the stroke of a pen or the raising of a hand in a parliamentary vote and the very same way can become legal.

What is more difficult a procedure is to correct media biases and errors.


P.S. Dan Bality's picture :

and then mine

Yaakov Moshe-Levi with Karin

what a parcelization and construction approval map look like

and here is a view Issachar P. of this morning - the valley innundated with water:

And a map to orient yourselves:

More here (Feb. 28, 2012, acting mayor Yaakov Moshe Levi points at the housing plan of the Svut Rachel settlement on the map, in the Jewish West Bank settlement of Shvut Rachel, near Nablus.) and also here (the Jewish West Bank settlement of Shvut Rachel, left, and the Jewish settlement of Shilo, right, near Nablus.)

____________

UPDATE

The following data has now been supplied to me:

695 units have been authorized for construction.
611 units in Shvut Rachel. Out of these, 90 are for existing structures and 521 for new buildings.
84 units for Shiloh, in the new neighborhood T'chelet St., 28 existing and another 56 new.
All these authorizations are not yet the final approval.

In other words, the apartment buildings in Ramat Shmuel are still awaiting.

^

Haaretz's Mistranslation

In an article by Merav Michaeli, I found this sentence

The Israeli media - frighteningly institutionalized as it has always been - also almost completely ignored the Saudi initiative.

I felt that was wrongly translated as I had originally read it in the Hebrew and here it is:

העניין הוא שהתקשורת הישראלית, בהיותה מאז ומעולם ממסדית להחריד, גם היא כמעט והתעלמה מהיוזמה הסעודית

The problem is this word ממסדית.

It does not mean "institutionalized" but rather "establishment", i.e.,  that the media serves the regime.

Either someone used Google Translate or they did not grasp her sarcasm.

And it is amazing that the right criticizes the media for being anti-establishment, radical and irresponsible whereas the left seems to feel it is a regime-server and a running-dog for the security and military institutions.

But, this is Israel.

^

The Media and Its Prey

From "The malicious media" by Dr. Haim Shine

When Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced that the Likud party would hold early primary elections, the renowned spin doctors of Israel's liberal Left began to smell the stink of general elections. In a classic Pavlovian response, the ammunition comes out and poisoned arrows are fired in every direction. Spirited, serrated arrows sharpened for years by the best self-hating creative Jewish minds. An ancient self-hatred, violent and uncompromising, whose self destruction mechanism has proven dangerous multiple times throughout Jewish history.

...the ultra-Orthodox are the first sector to be subjected to gutter politics with the familiar well-known slogans: attack the ultra-Orthodox, all of them without distinction, in their homes, in their yeshivas, for having too many children, on the bus, in the streets, in their schools, on billboards, at archeological digs – and save the state of Israel...

...There are those among us who are willing to break Israeli society apart and turn it into dust for a few measly Knesset seats. There are those who raise the flag of tolerance and respect but only when it comes to non-Jewish minorities.

There is another group that these knights of human dignity have in their sights: the 'settlers'. All of them, without distinction. Men, women and children who choose to deliver parts of Israel's historic legacy and settle in a reunited Jerusalem. Thanks to cruelty and malicious disinformation, they have become moving targets in the unrestrained shooting range of the media, which fires bullets of incitement at them. The media paints them as an obstacle standing in the way of peace, as lawbreakers and rowdy hilltop youth, as warmongers, as destroyers of the IDF, as land grabbers, as avoiders of singing women and what not.

Every night, those media copywriters sit in dark bars and pat each other on the back for raising the level of repulsion and hatred toward settlers. Only they forget that those same pioneering settlers, who man most elite combat units in the IDF, are the ones who make it possible for them to party every night in Tel Aviv, under a tumultuous Middle Eastern sky...

^

On Israel's New Libel Law Proposal

From Dror Eydar:

One law, one viewpoint


...the proposed amendment to the libel law...will definitely be modified before it enters the law books, if it even makes it in. But the propaganda surrounding it in the media this past week can fill an entire new volume of the adventures of Baron Munchausen.

...to allay our fears. Even if the bill becomes law, the media will continue its investigative reporting – probably presenting more reliable information than before, and hopefully getting responses of the subjects of investigation before going to print...the issue at hand is the mass hysteria encouraged by the media, which is careful to allow "experts" to explain the bill's shortfalls but fails to examine the reasons behind the formulation of the bill.

...For ages, the Israeli media has given a platform to a monolithic voice regarding the political and cultural issues that divide Israeli society, but it is convinced that it is being pluralistic...
...Take all the core issues under serious discussion in Israel today and ask yourselves: does the media really care to present the full range of opinions on these issues? Yesterday morning, journalist Razi Barkai interviewed Prof. Mordechai Kremnizer, following an interview with Dr. Arye (Arik) Carmon, and before that Prof. Yedidia Stern - three people who get interviewed time and time again. The common thread among them is that they all head the Israel Democracy Institute, a leftist body that opposes current legislation – and that is their right. But you won't find Barkai interviewing experts with no less merit who support the legislation. That is the world that he, and most of his colleagues, live in. That is also the depth of the news editors' interviewee lists - editors who all individually think alike...a one-dimensional media, whose political motivations supersede any journalistic ethics, and whose intellectual curiosity is limited to a narrow and embarrassing list of topics.

The proposed libel law amendment reflects the age-old mutual alienation that exists between the Israeli media and the public. It reflects the impossible situation in which a minority group has imposed its values, lifestyle, preferences, and belief system on us, while attempting to silence, ridicule, and drive the true majority insane.

Unfortunately, ethical journalism expired a long time ago, and with it went objectivity and integrity. And where there are no ethics, there will be laws.

And from Uriel Lynn:

...this bill actually has many positive aspects...[but] allow me to suggest one modification right off the bat: The amendment should impose a hefty fine on the source of the false information rather than on the reporter who prints it.

Anyone who understands democracy knows that freedom of the press is essential in providing the public with truth, and with the tools to criticize the bodies that govern it. The real problem is trying to strike a balance between freedom of the press and individuals' basic rights...It is much harder to prove the extent of the damage caused by libel than to prove the actual libel. Often the damage is impossible to prove – how can you measure the damage to someone's name?

...One can't help but get a sense that the press' harsh reaction to this amendment can be attributed to self-preservation and not just the preservation of democracy.

...The amendment also toughens the law against individuals who defame others maliciously, which is another welcome change. I propose that the bulk of the fine should be imposed not on the body that prints or broadcasts the libel, assuming they performed their basic duties, but rather on the source of the false information, even if the source is a government office – in fact, especially if the source is a government office...

 
^

A Comment of Israel's Media

From Dror Eydar:

...in the Israeli media, there are almost no balanced debates on these issues...There is no complex reality of advantages versus disadvantages. There is only the “sons of light” versus the “sons of darkness,” heaven versus the abyss.

...I know many fair, honest and wise intellectuals who believe the proposals have the power to rectify historical wrongs, and are capable of strengthening democracy. But those wise people receive absolutely no coverage in the media. Why? Indeed, the media betrays its own credo, and has itself become a political player.

...Did the media encourage an in-depth public debate about the dangerous ramifications of the [Oslo] agreement, and did it pursue then Chief of General Staff Ehud Barak to understand why he claimed that the agreement was "as full of holes as Swiss cheese"? Were Benny Begin's warnings given proper coverage, or were they ridiculed, similar to the way Shimon Peres called him "Abu Amar" (Yasser Arafat's nom de guerre, but also a play on the Hebrew word "amar," which can mean "said nonsensically").

As I become more familiar with the seventh power's (a.k.a. the media's) obscurity, I am shocked by how much charlatanism, anti-intellectualism, silencing of voices, and lack of independent thinking there is among those considered top-rate media personalities. There is no desire at all to maintain a balance, hear the voices of people who think differently, and accord legitimacy to different world views, even if they are widespread among the public.

and

Once again they interviewed Dr. Arye (Arik) Carmon on the topic of democracy and the "danger to democracy" that has become a mantra of late. Why is he superior to other, more competent experts in the fields of government, constitutions and democracy? (Radio station producers, feel free to ask me for an up-to-date list.) So what if he established a wealthy, Left-leaning institute that employs quite a few cronies who also have positions in universities or other educational institutions. So what?

...The relationship between Carmon, his institute and the media is like an allegory of the impossible reality we face in this part of the world. Democracy, poor democracy. Whenever the rule of the Left -- in the courts, prosecution, media, and academic sectors -- is weakened, and whenever an opportunity arises to change the one-dimensional political system that characterizes those institutions, from monolithic to pluralistic, to a more open-minded society that needs to exist in our complex "Israeli experience," someone pulls out the humiliating mantra, "You are damaging democracy."

^

New Media Term? "Go-go newsgathering culture"

"Go-go newsgathering culture" as in

...Politico’s go-go newsgathering culture has gotten a lot of attention over the years. Its coverage model is familiar to anyone who has ever cared about national politics. Overwhelm the reader with news items and informed analysis. First and most complete. When en route to the bathroom, never look up from the BlackBerry...The pace presents challenges even to seasoned reporters who’ve been on one beat for a number of years...

...Yet when you combine Politico Pro’s pressure for originality with Politico Regular’s factory conditions, you get a force powerful enough to corrupt an otherwise good journalist. . .You take a young person and rush them and put a lot of pressure on them.. . A former Politico reporter recalls the hours: From 9 a.m. until 7 p.m. in the office and availability via BlackBerry from 6 a.m. to 11 p.m. “I would feel weird going to sleep before 11:00 p.m. because I would not be able to respond to my BlackBerry,” this reporter said.

The pressure, the workload, the whole culture...

^

Haaretz - And the Concept of a Free Press

Free?

Well, free from Zionism, patriotism and even elementary ethics.

A mosque was daubed with slogans - settlers did it.

A mosque was torched - settlers did it.

A Muslim cemetery was vandalized - settlers did it.

But yesterday, other violent events happpened and?

Well, here's the headline:

Stones hurled at Jerusalem light rail, bus; police suspect nationalist motives
Bus driver lightly injured after rocks cause him to crash bus into wall; Jerusalem Police searching for perpetrators.

a) 'Arabs' is not mentioned. After all, it could have Jews, right? Alright, stop smirking. After all, those who know know that "nationalist motives" or a "nationalist crime" are euphemisms for Arabs. But it didn't prevent them earlier from pointing an accusatory finger at Jews, did it?

b) To be fair, the paper does note the dangerousness of such acts:

Rock throwing took the lives of two Israelis last month, Asher Palmer and his infant son Yonatan, who were killed in an incident in which rocks are believed to have been thrown from a passing car. Two Palestinians were arrested last week on suspicion of carrying out the act.

But "Palestinians" could be only Arabs? Jews can't be "Palestinians"? Has the paper adopted the racist apartheid policy of the PA to permit only Arabs in their new "Palestine"?

c) Again, to be fair - to Haaretz, that is - the Jerusalem Post headline was perhaps even more vague:-

J'lem: 2 stone throwing incidents damage bus, light rail

That was even more nebulous, almost as if the rocks were thrown anonymously.

God forbid we should mention the possibel (or probable) identity of the stonethrowers.

d) Ynet/Yedioth also were sparse on facts or credible assumptions:

Jerusalem: Stones hurled at Light Rail, bus

e) Of course, it seems the police also were reluctant to be accused of any "racist" approach and probably did not mention ethnic origin but, on the other hand, that did not stop the media in the previous 'price-tag' incidents when all were positive about the identity of the criminals.

Israel's so free a press.

Free from responsibility, free from fairness.

(I've dealt with this, too, at my JPost blog - Green-Lined)

^

The Guardian, The 'Occupation' and Artisitic Freedom

The Guardian reports on two budding film makers, cinema artists, from Gaza.

How do they define Gaza?

Read on:

"As artists we are restricted by living in a conservative and tough community," says Arab. "Let's be realistic. Our life is under siege, under control. People don't have time for art. They spend all their time looking for crumbs. They say, 'What use is art? Art will not give you bread.' "

Does anyone at The Guardian, the reporter, Harriet Sherwood, her editor, the foreign desk head - anyone ask himself this question:-

if Gaza was not under any 'occupation', would they still be
free and liberated, as artists, under the Hamas regime?

Would they?

And would The Guardian still report on them at that time?

^

Can You Trust the Media?

The Guardian, sourcing CPJ, reports that

Samer Allawi, Al-Jazeera's Kabul bureau chief, is unde arrested in Israel. He was detained last Tuesday after crossing the border between Jordan and the West Bank at the conclusion of a three-week vacation in his home town near Nablus.


The Israeli authorities originally informed Allawi's family that he would be held for four days for questioning, saying that it was a "security-related arrest."

Last Thursday, the authorities told Al-Jazeera that Allawi's detention would be extended to eight days.

Er, "He was detained last Tuesday after crossing the border between Jordan and the West Bank"?

If he crossed over to Jordan, how is he being held by Israel?

^

Funny But That Shiksa Looks Jewish

In a DailyMail story on

Christian girls who go to church are 'more tolerant of other faiths than their peers'

the accompanying picture doesn't seem to be illustrating a shiksa but a nice Jewish girl who is also most probably a resident of Yesha and demonstrating on behalf of Jewish residency rights in our homeland.

What do you think?

I'll bet she's reading from the book of Pslams.

(with appreciation, as always, to CR)

Oh, and yes, our girls can appear so:

______________________________

UPDATE

The phenomenal EOZ has found it!

Here's the original:`

P.S.  VelvetUnderground linked it:

^