Being Framed
Israel's Treatment
by the World Media
by
Yisrael Medad
Director, Israel’s Media Watch
"The following opinion piece was written for the Swiss
weekly, Israelitisches Wochenblatt, and relates directly to
several Swiss Jewish journalists. Nevertheless, the general
comments refer just as well to many other correspondents in the
the foreign media who report on Israel.I was submitted on August
19, 1998.".
If one were to believe the news "frame"
emanating out of Europe's major
electronic and written media, as well as that of America,
one would necessarily conclude, that Israel is on the way
towards
committing national suicide. Bashing Prime Minister Netanyahu is
a
favorite pasttime. That over half of Israel's Jewish
population supports
him and his policies is seen as further evidence that Israelis
are on the
wrong track and are moving away from 'peace' towards 'war'.
A good example of the attitude towards Israel today is
exemplified by
the writings of Mr. Pierre Heumann, a frequent contributor to the
Israelitische Wochenblatt and Mr. Jacques Ungar, the
Israeli correspondent
of the Juedische Rundschau. Ever since the Shimon Peres
lost the elections
and was replaced by the leader of the national/religious camp,
these two
have consistently bashed Israel and its government. To
paraphrase Heumann,
Israel's catastrophic situation today is a direct result of the
lack of 'progress'
in the 'peace process'.
On the other side of the Atlantic, Mr. David Remnick, the newly
appointed
editor of the prestigious New Yorker magazine, published in May
this year a profile on
Prime Minister Netanyahu after a short trip to Israel.
Israel's Media
Watch's in-depth study of Mr. Remnick and his journalist
practices showed that he knew in advance that his article would
try its best to tear Netanyahu apart. Even when he
interviewed supporters of the Prime Minister, their views were
misrepresented.
Essential portions of his article were either copied verbatim or
he adapted key phrases and ideas of other journalists. His
'piece' was, to say the least, less than professional.
CNN makes it a practice to broadcast extremely biased reports
from Israel.
Consider the latest case (Aug. 18, 1998), in which they described
how Israeli
'lawmakers' looked into PLO complaints that Israel was not
supplying the
autonomy with sufficient water. CNN did not follow journalistic
ethics, by
informing the viewers that the Israeli 'lawmakers' were all
members of the
extreme left, supporters of Arafat. Of course, CNN also did not
attempt to present
official Israeli claims that the problem is a result of a lack of
adequate
infrastructure in the autonomous regions, nor did it
present
the reckless usage of water by Palestinians, the lack of will by
the
Palestinian Authority to crack down on Arab water thieves and the
serious
pollution of water sources by Arabs in the PA.
The American-based CAMERA organisation, which seeks to assure
accuracy in
Middle East reporting, has accused CNN numerous times for false
or biased
reporting. For example, CNN's Jerusalem bureau claimed that the
Arab population in Jerusalem was dwindling as a consequence of
harsh
Israeli policies. Despite an exhaustive report documenting the
falsity of
the charges - the Arab population is growing four times faster
than the
Jewish population - the network refused to correct itself.
On the other hand, crucial information about Israel is distorted
or omitted.
The Neue Zueriche Zeitung systematically refrains from describing
Palestinian violations of the Oslo accords. Incendiary statements
by
PA officials, including Arafat, which are contrary to the Oslo
accords
and are clearly newsworthy, are just not reported. Israel
faces a double
standard. Any derogatory remark or misdeed of Israelis
towards the PA is
headlined while the other side of the coin is nonexistent. The
picture drawn
in the foreign media is that Arafat has accepted the US
initiative, while
Netanyahu is procrastinating and is untrustworthy. Arafat's
serious
breaches of his agreements become acceptable practice.
Israelis in general mistrust Arafat and do not believe
that he is interested in peace with Israel. They tend to believe
his
proclamations, that ultimately, all of Palestine will be a
Palestinian state
with Jerusalem as its capital. Therefore they strongly support
Netanyahu's
careful negotiations. Nevertheless, this rational reality is
missing in
press reports about Israel.
There are many factors responsible for the anti-Israeli bias.
Foremost,
Israel is a democracy and information is open and available. This
is not so in most
Arab countries. A journalist can obtain valuable information in a
dictatorship only if he toes the line. No wonder that the
reports of the NZZ emanating
from Cairo are usually anti-Israeli. Foreign journalists,
especially those
who do not know the local language, rely heavily on their local
counterparts.
As documented thoroughly by Israel's Media Watch, Israeli
journalists are
largely left-wing and strong antagonists of the present
government. Foreign
journalists are fed by their Israeli counterparts and base many
of their
reports on the local media, who have a strong anti-government
bias.
This reflection of the local bias existed also during the tenure
of the
Rabin-Peres government. The Israeli media strongly supported the
Rabin Peres policy and the foreign press followed suit, painting
Israel's future in the 'glowing'
terms of Mr. Peres’ visionary "New Middle
East". Sometimes a reporter’s own
prejudices override his own ethical obligation and he is
interested in
obtaining material which fits his own subjective grasp of the
situation.
Economics are an important part of the equation.
International news
magazines have
many more subscribers (and advertisers) in the Moslem world then
they have
in Israel.
CNN and SKY have many more Moslem viewers then Israeli viewers.
It would be
economic foolishness to antagonize the larger market. Arab oil
money should not be
belittled. Journalists are given junket trips and other
'perks' by
various organizations. Israel's government cannot compete
financially with
Saudi Arabia and the Arab emirates. Many coutries depend
on Arab oil, keeping its price low is an important
priority.
Israel, its history, its political culture, its Zionist ideology
and its
conflict with the local Arab population is an almost impossible
story to
tell. It is much too complex for 40 second sound bites on TV
which naturally
reflect the harsh, the bad and the sensational. Serious and
balanced
documentary films about Israel are sorely lacking. Undoubtedly,
Israel and its present
government, like others, has made mistakes and will probably
continue to do so.
However, it has also had enormous successes.
The media consumer finds it difficult to make a relative value
judgment about
a news event, because he is presented with news stories which are
framed.
These "frames" can restrict the presentation of the
full news story. One
receives more of an impression rather than reality and this works
against
Israel.
In the long run, as long as the international media continues to
bash Israel without presenting a balanced picture, it will lose
its
credibility. If its handling of Israel is so poor, can it be
trusted in its reporting on
other issues?
Yisrael Medad is Director of Israel’s Media
Watch, a media consumer protection group
IMW is a registered non-profit organization whose major aim is
assuring the ethical and fair conduct of the Israeli media.
Return to Home Page Return to List of Papers
This page hosted by Geocities
Get
your own FreeHome
Page