Wednesday, December 08, 2004

No Damage Caused?

Quoting from an AP report, the New York Times informed
its readers that an anti-tank missile was fired into a
civilian Jewish community in Gaza. While it caused no
damage or injuries, the missile had exploded near a
nursery school.

The report then noted that "Palestinian militants
frequently fire rockets and mortar shells at
settlements and army bases, but they rarely cause
casualties." ("Israel, Palestinians Reach Election
Plan", Dec. 8). This last phrase is obviously a
throwaway, as if to say 'well, nothing happened so why
get all upset and injuries or worse are rare, so who
really cares'.

Rarely caused casualties are not to be dismissed as
insignificant. The intent of the planning and effort
of these "militants" is to kill and maim innocent
civilians and, in this specific case, infants and
young kindergarten children. They are not 'militants'
but coldblooded killers, terrorists.

I hope that the NYT will pursue the issue of the questionable journalistic validity of continuing to use the term "militants"
and its use will soon come to a conclusion and that the word will not be employed to describe such actions and operations.

The wording of the AP report should not have been
adopted by the New York Times.

1 comment:

tracy said...

Yes, NYT shouldn't use word 'millitant' for those bloddy terrorists. At least, they should use their own mind , what they are publishing?

dentists edinburgh