Too much Gaza coverage?
| 16:54 UK time, Friday, 15 June 2007
On the World Tonight this week we have devoted considerable airtime to the fighting in Gaza between Hamas and Fatah and it has been our lead story most of the week. Is that overstating the importance of the story?
If you accept the argument of the American commentator, Edward Luttwak, , the answer to this question is undoubtedly, yes.
In a thought-provoking article - which I suspect involved an element of playing the devil's advocate - Mr Luttwak argued that analysts and journalists pay far too much attention to the Palestinian/Israeli conflict and give it too much prominence. He says it isn't that important because 鈥渢he conflict is contained within rather narrow boundaries, and second because the Levant is just not that important any more.鈥 He says that since the end of the Cold War the conflict is contained and the geo-strategic importance of the region is declining because the world is less reliant on Middle Eastern oil than it used to be.
So are we right to be giving the events in Gaza such prominence?
Trying to restore peace and stability - however you define that - has been a major theme in international affairs for the past sixty years, if not longer if you include the aftermath of the collapse of the Ottoman Empire at the end of the First World War. And if the putative Palestinian state which is seen as one of the best hopes for peace and stability implodes - which it appears to be dong this week - that is obviously an important event with serious implications which merits coverage.
Also, if the Palestinian/Israeli conflict drags on, it will continue to add fuel to the resentment many in the Muslim world feel toward the West and the United States. Whether or not you accept the argument that the situation in the Middle East lies at the heart of the conflict between the West and Islamist groups like al-Qaeda, the issue is a cause of resentment among Muslims who believe the West is biased in favour of Israel.
The 大象传媒 is committed to covering the Middle East in depth - which is why we had a correspondent in Gaza and why our colleague Alan Johnston was prepared to risk his personal safety by being there.
I accept that it is one thing to have correspondents on the ground to report events, and another for editors back in London to give the prominence we give to the story, and of course decisions on which stories we lead with are made in relation to the merits of other stories on the day (and this week there have not been very many other big stories), but what do you think? Are we getting this one right?
Comments
Did I read ...
"and the geo-strategic importance of the region is declining because the world is less reliant on Middle Eastern oil than it used to be."
I think not. Just look at the importance the US gives to Iraq.
Regards HLP
Your coverage is vital. The importance of the Middle East in world affairs has only grown in recent years, which the 40th anniversary of the Six-Day War has underscored. Formerly a proxy battleground for the U.S. and the Soviet Union, the Middle East and the treatment of Palestinians remains the present day rallying cry for Muslim extremists around the world. The destruction this week of the Palestinian state even before its official existence has its roots in decades of failure by Israelis, Arabs and the rest of the world to foster the economic stability for true Palestinian self-rule.
Continue your coverage and courage!
Hmm.. I can't quite understand this. I can certainly see the argument about there being too much coverage of, say, Madeleine McCann. But the Middle East is a news story of global significance and I think anyone who thinks the coverage is too much either has an axe to grind, or makes the fair point that Iraq has far less coverage now than it did, even though the level of violence is no less.
Re:Too much Gaza coverage?
It is important that coverage of the conflict in Gaza be reported, and the Israli/Palestinian conflict in general.
It is refreshing to know that some news networks actually report news and not continuous updates on Paris Hilton.
I feel that the coverage I've heard and seen (on News 24 & the World Service) has been just right. I know the 大象传媒 has had criticism on it's coverage of events in Israel & Palestine, but the 大象传媒 have covered the Fatah-Hamas fighting very well.
P.S. I hope Alan Johnston is released soon - his reports from Gaza are more needed now than ever.
While I do see the importance of in-depth coverage of the Gaza conflict, I can't help but wonder why so little attention is being paid to the Darfur conflict where an estimated 200,000-400,000 have died and left more than 2,500,000 people as refugees, or the civil war in Northern Uganda that has resulted in another 400,000+ people displaced plus thousands of deaths. Granted, those events might not effect the West as much as the Gaza fighting does; however, that it no excuse for the shocking lack of media coverage and global participation to stop these atrocities.
While I do see the importance of in-depth coverage of the Gaza conflict, I can't help but wonder why so little attention is being paid to the Darfur conflict where an estimated 200,000-400,000 have died and left more than 2,500,000 people as refugees, or the civil war in Northern Uganda that has resulted in another 400,000+ people displaced plus thousands of deaths. Granted, those events might not effect the West as much as the Gaza fighting does; however, that it no excuse for the shocking lack of media coverage and global participation to stop these atrocities.
It is exactly the point. The Arab media/leaders use this conflict as a means to distract the Arab people from failing of the Arab world in regards to building a functional economy & society. By constantly over reporting on the conflict & providing one sided editorials, 大象传媒 supports this notion. It fails to asks real question like why Arabs are not concern that millions of Palestinians living next door to them in refugee camps for OVER 40 yrs. Why when Arabs had West Bank, Gaza & Jerusalem it meant nothing to them, when it become Israeli they became so excited. One good example of poor editorials is 鈥淏reaking point in the Middle East?鈥 by Jeremy Bowen, which blames current violence on the fact that Western world refused to provide aid to Hamas unless it recognizes Israel. Apparently he thinks it was too much to ask. What is he taking about? Is it our fault that 鈥渄emocratically鈥 elected government chose to starve it own people, instead of just making a commitment that everyone knows that no one would hold them to. Reporting the truth & being honest is hard, but 大象传媒 fails at this regard very much.
I don't think that all this reporting of Israel/Pakistan is a bad thing. However, it does get too much attention *in comparison with* other hotspots such as those in Africa.
I'd certainly support a slight reduction in Israel/Pakistan coverage in return for a lot more information on all the other countries where things are going wrong. And it would be nice to think that if the coverage began to balance out (and it's all the Western media I blame for this, not just you) then perhaps our politicians will start doing more about the likes of Sudan as well.
Mr. Burnett,
I think this calls for a broader rethinking of what constitutes news. News organizations spend enormous amounts of money in providing live blow by blow accounts of violence. These accounts add very little to the overall understanding of the issue. I believe that the money would be better spent in providing in-depth reportage about fundamental causes, solutions, and statistical details about the problem.
Secondly, I do agree that media spends entirely too much time on Israeli/Palestinian conflict. Of course their coverage of the conflict is only trumped by their coverage of celebrities. But lets leave that aside for a second. In terms of geo-strategic importance the Middle-East is vitally important. Edward Luttwak obviously pays little attention to facts when providing analysis. In terms of human misery, there are bigger 'fish' to fry.
Overall I would recommend that 大象传媒, which is head and shoulders above any other news organization, spend more time on providing quality in-depth multi-page well-documented analysis about issues and a little more time on poverty and myriad other conflicts that extract a larger human toll.
The 大象传媒 are indeed stuck between a rock and a hard place. Israel is a smaller country than Wales however about one third of UN resolutions are related to this small country.
I agree with Greg S too. If the surrounding Arab countries really cared there wouldn't be Palestinian refugee camps. Maybe one day the Palestinian people will realise how much they are being used as pawns in the Arab-Israeli conflict.
The 大象传媒 consistently ignores a far more pertinent question than the quantity of coverage - that is the quality of its coverage of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
Instead of pointing an accusing finger at the West, your Middle East editor Jeremy Bowen should rather take an honest look at exactly what aid flows into Gaza. There is UNRWA - the agency set up specifically to provide humanitarian assistance to Palestinian "refugees", whether or not they live in "refugee camps". Western governments contribute to this agency through the UN so they are in any event indirectly assisting the Palestinians. Iran has recently pumped hundreds of millions of dollars into Hamas and Saudi Arabia gives considerable amounts of cash to the families of suicide bombers who kill Israeli civilians. Until his downfall Saddam Hussein was doing likewise. Recently a senior Hamas leader was caught smuggling millions of dollars into Gaza from Egypt in suitcases - most probably from a "militant" sympathiser afloat on a sea of black gold. No doubt there is plenty of other cash flowing in that we don't know about.
Why does the 大象传媒 not investigate and report on these sources of funding? Could it be because then the 大象传媒 would have to stop perpetuating the myth that the Palestinians are in a state of terrible suffering because of a "boycott" by the West and Israel?
Palestinian information minister Mustafa Barghouti recently participated in your televised Have Your Say programme. In the background we could see the multi-storey first-world buildings, paved roads and manicured green areas of Ramallah. Some "refugee camp". And we constantly see similar televised images from Gaza.
Mr. Burnett, until you start asking the right questions about places like Gaza, your speculation about the amount of coverage will remain irrelevant.
All this coverage of the warring groups in Palestine takes away from the very necessary coverage of Paris Hilton in jail. How else can children learn what getting arrested twice for drunk driving will bring?
I agree Westerners appear to be siding more toward Israel and against those who have declared that Westerners have no right to exist on their soil. When some people say Westerners and all Western ideas and things are evil, it's easily understandable that Westerners would take that slant. Seeing how much Westerners appear to applaud the behavior of Paris Hilton, it's also understandable how people would come to think that Westerners are not good people. For a better understanding, everything should be looked at in context, with the lens of the other side understood.
I was shocked to see that the 大象传媒 was being critized. I had litterly been watching another news program and saw the Palestinian dissolvemnt on a crawler across the screen. I waited for the anchor to mention it, 45 minutes latter, nothing. so I came to the 大象传媒 site to find out what was going on.
As an american I can honestly say ANY amount of coverage on someplace other than USA is a breath of fresh air. These events are important and they deserve coverage. The United States is unfortunately already mired in Asia Minor and something like this unless handled very carefully could lead to an even bigger "police force" in the area.
So Thank you, for covering such and important event as it unfolds because each step is important and honestly I can not trust any news orginization in the USA to tell me anything.
I think everybody needs to try to get along a little better. In the city I live in I see Black against Whites, Whites against everybody who is different, everybody against the Orientals and Spanish, the Young against the Old, I turn on the TV and see Gork against Godzilla---People need to focus on living a happy healthy life, and stop buying guns and killing other humans.
Mr Luttwak says that since the end of the Cold War the conflict is contained and the geo-strategic importance of the region is declining because the world is less reliant on Middle Eastern oil than it used to be.
What an amazing statement - where does he live? Saudi Arabia?
If oil was not important, why did the Americans invade Iraq?
Dear Alistair: Agree completely with your analysis of the centrality of the P/Israeli conflict as fundamental in resolving Middle East issues. We did a post recently on the Islamic Adhan as the Emerging Icon of the Century that focused on same issues. All interested can read it at dailygalaxy.com
Current violence is based on the current unwillingness of leaders to progress matters towards any kind of peaceful settlement. Until there is a leadership courageous enough - and lacking the ego to insist they be the leaders in teh future - to say that picking over past wrongs is not going to solve anything and trying to find a practical solution to things as they stand there is little hope.
As for the muslim world, whatever that is. (Palestine no more represents Muslim countries than Brazil represents the Christian/Secular world.) But it is terribly useful for those - whether terrorist or dictator - to build a power base from whipping up grievances.
Grievances over Palestine are also somewhere to direct the energies of the under employed young men in the Arab world rather than tackle the corruption which makes their economies share their wealth so inequally.
I don't get it -- Palestinians are holding your man Alan Johnston -- how can you claim
impartiality when you are obviously compromised.
Can you, without jeopardizing Alan's life freely utter a sentence on your program:
"In its summary executions on the streets of Gaza, Hamas has proven that it is a murderous death cult"
No -- I didn't think so.
The Arab- Israeli conflict and the in-fighting between the Palestinian factions affect the whole region and have world-wide reverberations. So daily coverage with in-depth analysis would no doubt be necessary. The senseless killing, the thirst for power, the genuine cry for freedom by Palestinians from Israeli yolk are all inter-connected. So all these perspectives need to be given full treatment.It is far better to get lucid accounts however sombre rather than allow events to be swept under the carpet. The 大象传媒 has got the balance right.
Luttwak is right their is too too much coverage about the Middle East, and for the reasons he states including the West's dependency on oil.
The 大象传媒 should instead focus on European news more, which is much more vital to UK's interests.
But no doubt not so exciting for expense account 大象传媒 reporters hoping to get a book about their experiences at least.
Bryan is absolutely right, forget the camount of coverage, look at the entirely predictable liberal perspective. The anti-Israeli bias of the 大象传媒 and its reporters is now so blatant that it is embarrassing. Bowen, following in the footsteps of Guerlin et al, blame Israel for the cuurent civil war amongst the Palestinians. Is he saying that Israel should not have left Gaza in the first place? First and foremost the Palestinians are to blame for their killing each other.
Alistair,
This is an extremely accurate statement of the immense influence this situation has on the perception of "the West".
At least the 大象传媒's coverage is relatively complete and broadly balanced. Keep up the good work.
Salaam/Shalom
ed
i have more of a question than a comment. i would appreciate if you had the time to answer it.
it seems pretty clear that your coverage of the fighting in gaza left out any mention of unpleasant behavior by hamas (ie throwing people off buildings, executing people in the street, etc.), which was ok, i guess.
but now you seem to being focusing on the same things when fatah does it in the west bank (eg scuffling with officials).
then you say fatah "ransacked the ministry of education," but use quotation marks on "'sabotaged'" when hamas members ransacked arafat's house.
you even have a quote from hamas about how their members were kidnapped and executed in gaza.
is this just because you lost your reporter in gaza, and can't get info? you could always look on the new york time's webpage. they have pretty good description of what's happened in gaza.
i hope that's all it is. it seems kind of strange to have a bias towards hamas, of all things.
In my opinion the coverage in Gaza has been warranted given the gravity of the situaiton. However, I would prefer to see the 大象传媒 drop the pretence of being impartial and compile newsreports without constantly pointing the finger at Israel and the West.
The Today programme rolled out George Galloway last week as an expert on the Middle East. Come on, 大象传媒. That's stretches the imagination just a little too much.
The Middle East is still of geo-strategic interest. Just look at Dick Cheney's 1999 speech to the Petroleum Institue in London to appreciate the attraction of easily pumped-out oil in the region.
As some have pointed out, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict remains in the spotlight of Arab media so that other problems can remain in the shadow. Therefore, the western media have to cover it also but that doesn't mean that they should concentrate all their attention on all Muslim issues as if Islam was the only non-western religion. Tariq Ramadan has coined the word "Islamophobia" but who's ever heard of Hinduphobia, Buddhaphobia or Confuciophobia in western Europe ?
The 大象传媒 does an excellent job in reporting on the conflict, but appears to sometimes forget that when criticising Israel from Western liberal standpoint, the country is surrounded by
countries and organisations who are committed to destroying this small and uniquely democratic (for the region) state who wants to ensure its own future existance. What the Iranian nuclear project is going to do to the balance of power, is frightening.
I agree that the coverage seems about right. On a minor issue I was surprised at the low prominence given on News 24 last night (Friday) to the Hamas announcement re Alan Johnston. This was given blanket 'breaking news' flashing screen message coverage by SKY yet only featured as an aside half way through News 24. I thought this rather strange considering AJ is a 大象传媒 reporter.
No i dont think the 大象传媒 has overcoverd what's happend in Gaza this week.I look at CNN and SKY news and they also have coverd it well.
But understand what's happend there and why?I dont,the Palestiniens must be the people that are world champions in destroying things for themselves.Where does Hamas think this will get them by killing their own brothers this week?
And final,let Alan Johnston go.It's men like him that reports in a neutral way what is happening in the middle east.
Your coverage is not only excessive when compared to what is happening in many other parts of the world, but it is also biased against Israel. The appalling rants of Jeremy Bowen are one of the more obvious manifestations of the Biased Broadcasting Corportation's hatred for Israel and the Jewish people.
Does not the answer to this lie in moving news presentation away from a hierarchical format towards a menu-driven one? So that instead of us being presented with the same, pre-selected, set of stories, graded in importance by the broadcaster, we are each given the option to choose which story we wish to view, and whether we receive reportage or comment. Does not 大象传媒i demonstrate that the technology is available to develop this type of arrangement?
It's not the coverage - it's the way it's covered!
Today's Sky News (Colin Brazier) was typical (missed yours today!). The main concern for the man on the ground was what a Hamas government would mean for women in Gaza. The sub-text was: Islam is evil isn't it? Women are oppressed aren't they? Sorry, has this got something to do with the current state of affairs?! It won't surprise me if this will become one of the main thrusts of the reporting on Hamas from now on. Let's completely ignore the real causes of the conflict which is the US/EU embargo and the deliberate attempt to topple Hamas by funding Fatah and by providing intelligence. You have all already decided that Abbas is the hero and already degraded our intelligence and your profession by making it a good-guy bad-guy conflict. The comments by the Palestinian Ambassador about the real causes of the conflict were dismissed as his "take on the causes of the conflict". They say that the willingness to criticize Israel and its allies is now the litmus test of intellectual integrity for journalists and politicians and as fas as today's comments on Gaza goes you have all failed! And then you let Margaret Becket get away with her ridiculous, fatuous statement. It would be more interesting to watch a mouse eating a piece of cheese.
At presant every thing is on extreem not only too much Gaza coverage infact EU & USA are doing toomuch with Demotric public openion this is why hump of Gaza is viseable on the face of Democracy.
No doubt denial of public openion will create more distruction in Middle East as Isriel is a declared violater of human rights & been supported by world class Democracies this is why peacefull solution of Middle East is kind of impossible.
Quality & essesance of Democracy is far away from crimes against humanity.
I think that 大象传媒's coverage of the gaza conflict has been quite good recently as you have given time to both sides more than previous palestinian conflicts. I can only hope that your friends at ABC and fox news stop calling all the violence due to Fatah as 'factional fighting', yet every time Hamas starts fighting they will specifically mention that it is Hamas causing the violence; which i feel is unfair.
AIPAC has far too much influence over reporting of Israeli conflicts in most media corporations.
I dont agree with Bryans previous comments. It seems as if he is just looking at this from the typical Hamas = Evil terrorists view that Mr Bush has tried to drill into us since Hamas were elected.
Also, Bryan, you mention that Iran has given Hamas money, well, its about time someone did, because israel has continually banned Hamas from the aid they deserve, which is maybe why they have not been able to govern very efficiently.
I am actually quite shocked at some of the media discrepancies on this conflict. For example ABC reported 105% of israeli childrens deaths, sometimes multiple times, compared to only 22% of palestinian deaths from september 2005 to march 2007, which is a disgraceful ratio for any media outlet. Although the 大象传媒's reporting is not as clearly biased as this i do feel that you fail to criticize Israel as much as you should.
Israel also has such a bad record with human rights, more international crimes than any other country in the world. And also their continual use of palestinian children as human shields is disgraceful. Alot more palestinians have been killed than Israeli's, more than ten times, yet we are led to believe that Hamas are the terrorists and Israel is the victim. Well i dont buy it.
There has been quite a lot of coverage of the strife in Gaza. Sad to say... it's always the same old story: violence and bloodshed in lieu of common sense and prosperity.
It must be the first coup d'etat by an elected government. That is definitely worth some coverage!
The coverage of the Gaza crisis is vital, we need to understand it because it will impact upon relations between Israel and Palestine. What happens in this conflict will certainly impact upon the middle east and the rest of the world. It is right that the 大象传媒 choose to cover this story instead of Paris Hilton and moaning about Tony Blair.We need to understand the conflict in depth and concentrate on affairs that will have an affect on us and others.
I think it is a bit rich for somebody to ask if there is too much coveage of the Gaza crisis. The media will select and choose which stories to cover and ignore others. As somebody has rightfully pointed out, the Darfur crisis has been ignored completly and probably will stop being ignored when the media have a slow news day.
The "importance" of a conflict is not only measured by its geopolitical significance in the short term but also by its long term geopolitical significance and by the human tragedy involved.
On these counts the Middle east conflict remains one that merits full coverage. The conflict is important in long term geopolitical becaus eof the symbolic importance it has for Muslims. Resolve the Palestinian issue and a significant cause of Muslim anger worldwide is resolved.
The Palestinians, never ones to pass up an opportunity, are currently tearing themselves apart. Their plight has been a human tragedy for years; due the lack of resolve by the US to force Israel into making a fair resolution and due the lack of wise Palestinian leadership.
One can only hope that if the West Bank comes firmly under the control of Fatah that Israel and the US are wise enough to see an opportunity before them.
Offer the Palestinians a just settlement for the West Bank/Jerusalem and support Fatah who have shown some ability to negotiate.
Offer the guarantee that this just settlement will include Gaza - on the condition that Hamas rejects violence towards Israel - or hold it open pending fatah resuming control of Gaza.
This is a time for bold thinking; not just on the military front but on the political front.
Peace between western and islamic Worlds have red line- Palestine.
At first we must be honest and say "NO" to Israel media blockade and support Palestinian Rights. And than we can start talking about rule of law, democracy in the Middle East and Islamic Worlds...How to start open dialogue? Civil Society can play a big role. One of Catholic organization, based in the EU - have a good start for Open Dialogue.
Well you recently received a report on your coverage of the middle east conflict, The Balen report. A report reported to be so critical of your bias in reporting this story that you had to spend thousands of pounds of TV-tax payers money to suppress it. Until this report is released I take your words with a big pinch of salt. As has been said above, it is not the quantity it is the quality, and in this you are failing miserably.
You are reporting on Gaza etc as it is. It would be helpful to hear some voices of moderation from both sides in this complex situation--are there any signs of hope?
Yes, there is too much 大象传媒 attention on the Palestinian - Israel issue. However, it is the dubious reporting of the issues that has become as much of an issue for the listener/viewer as 大象传媒 coverage is ever more pro-Arab & less even-handed. 大象传媒 Journalists operate in democratic Israel & therefore their access to what goes on behind the official scene is much more varied: Surely, the 大象传媒 should begin every news item from Gaza & the West Bank Palestinian areas with the cautionary words, "We are operating under close scrutiny by Hamas, Fatah," or whoever.., or something similar (as it does for Zimbabwhe)?
Finally, I say again: British & indeed Worldwide public opinion is becoming increasingly dismissive/bored with this seemingly intractable Mid-East crisis, particularly as the Palestinians seem especially incapable of any genuine Statesmanship of any description. A similar attitude did help bring about a change in the N.Ireland issue as the men of violence & their manic supporters perceived the mainland British simply could not care a less about them! Sad, but true!
Yes, you are absolutely right to give plenty of coverage to this. This is the kind of serious journalism the 大象传媒 is very good at and should be doing all the time.
Call me cynical, though, but in the modern dumbed-down 大象传媒, I wonder if you'd have given it so much coverage if anything interesting had happened on Big Brother that day?
More real news, and less celebrity gossip please!
...which is why we had a correspondent in Gaza and ...
Johnston is still your Gaza correspondent, abducted or not.
Sean (22) and JG (40) support my view (12) while greg (34) opposes it. Of the four of us, greg is the only one who doesn't back his assertions with facts and logic. It's not good enough just to blandly state that Hamas "deserves" aid. Exactly why is this the case? Between 2000 and 2004, during the "Second Intifada", Hamas and other groups like Islamic Jihad and Fatah's al-Aksa Martyrs Brigade launched an unprecedented terrorist assault on Israel. Over 1000 Israelis, mostly civilians, were slaughtered in drive-by shootings and by suicide bombers on buses, in clubs and in restaurants. Women, children and the elderly were not spared. They were, in fact, deliberately targeted.
The dust from Israel's withdrawal from Gaza had hardly settled when Hamas resumed its attacks on civilians in nearby Sderot with Kassam rockets. Greg should ask himself why Hamas is somehow worthy of aid, especially since it will not renounce its declared intention to destroy Israel. Aid for terrorists is support for terror.
I don't know which web sites greg has been reading but the "continual use [by Israelis] of palestinian children as human shields" is simply a lie. The terrorists are in fact the ones who use Palestinian children as shields.
Mr. Burnett, the 大象传媒 should start to play fair in its reporting on this conflict. Up till now, you've been helping to keep people like greg in ignorance with your omission and distortion of facts.
It's one thing to speculate about whether you are getting the balance right in terms of the amount of Gaza coverage, but when are we going to get a comprehensive analysis of Palestinian terror from the 大象传媒? For example, how many people who get their news from the 大象传媒 know that Islamic Jihad is armed, financed and trained by Iran? One would think that little bit of information is extremely relevant in the light of Ahmedinejad鈥檚 intention to "wipe Israel off the map."
I don't know if your Gaza coverage was 'too much' but I find your coverage of world events overall completely out of balance. How many people are aware of what is going on in the DRC or Darfur/Chad?
Oh brother! Does the 大象传媒 devote too much coverage to the Middle East conflict and (in a related and more essential question), is that coverage fair and unbiased? Well, let's see what editors at the 大象传媒 had to say about this issue when I addressed it with them in an exchange of emails a couple of years ago.
Sir
I鈥檇 like to bring to your attention a graphic example of why the 大象传媒 receives much criticism with regard to its reporting on the Middle East conflict. As I write this letter, the 大象传媒 has on its website, two articles about killings in the Middle East and Africa. One story, about a single Palestinian man killed while he approached a border fence is entitled 鈥淚sraelis Shoot Dead Palestinian鈥. The other story, about 100 people killed in a bombing raid by the Sudanese government is entitled 鈥淪udan Troops in Darfur Offensive鈥. The details on the killings do not appear in the headline nor in the following paragraph printed in bold.
If this example of unbalanced reporting were an aberration, one might suggest that it was due perhaps, to poor discretion being exercised by 大象传媒 website editors on this occasion. This type of asymmetric reporting however, is routine for the 大象传媒. When Israelis are involved in the deaths of Palestinians 鈥 one in this case 鈥, the 大象传媒 employs direct, active language in the headline and body of its articles to describe the incident and assign unambiguous culpability to Israel. By contrast, when reporting on the killings of Israelis by Palestinians 鈥 or in this case, the murder of 100 civilians by the government of Sudan 鈥 the language is typically passive and circumspect.
As a frequent reader of the 大象传媒 website (and a TV license payer in the UK), I find the 大象传媒鈥檚 bias transparent and deeply offensive. It also represent a clear violation of your public charter to be fair and balanced in your reporting鈥.
This was the 大象传媒鈥檚 reply:
As the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the conflict in Darfur take place in completely different contexts, it is clear that different editorial approaches need to be taken. The Middle East editorial team tries - as far as possible - to address each deadly act of Israeli-Palestinian violence in a balanced and objective way, with a focus the team tries to apply to all the countries in its region, even Iraq. That close-up focus is much less likely in African conflicts of which Darfur is an example which are dealt with by the Africa editorial team.
In addition, headlines are not to used to assign culpability, but rather to sum up the story in as brief a way as possible (in a template of 31-33 characters). This inevitably results in an avoidance of longer words, which may be why there may be a slight imbalance. Nevertheless a search through the 大象传媒 News website archive produces headlines where:
1. Palestinians are killed without mentioning an agent:
Five Palestinians killed in Gaza (30/12/2004)
2. Israelis are killed with an agent mentioned:
Suicide blasts kill 11 Israelis (14/03/2004)
3. And where there have been multiple (Palestinian) deaths which are not mentioned in the headline
Major Israeli incursion in Gaza (25/10/2004)
To which I replied in turn:
1. Why should the 鈥渇ocus鈥 of 大象传媒 reporting be different for the Middle East than for Africa such that your ME editorial team takes a 鈥渃lose-up focus鈥 while your African editorial team takes a 鈥 presumably 鈥 鈥渞emote鈥 focus? Do the deaths of 100 Sudanese merit less personal attention than the death of one Palestinian?
2. The suggestion that the substantive difference in headlines is due to space limitations is risible. Please note that the headline, 鈥淚sraelis Shoot Dead Palestinian鈥 contains 31 characters while the headline 鈥淪udan Troops in Darfur Offensive鈥 contains 32 characters. The latter headline could have just as easily read, 鈥淪udan Army kills 100 in Darfur鈥 which would have required only 30 characters and would have been a far more accurate rendering of the incident.
3. The headline you have provided as an example of the 大象传媒 identifying an agent, 鈥淪uicide blasts kill 11 Israelis鈥 (14/03/2004), does nothing of the sort. In fact, it overtly fails to identify a Palestinian as the perpetrator of the murders.
As demonstrated, your arguments attempting to justify the different handling of the two stories are weak and facile. The truth is that the 大象传媒 maintains a distinct editorial bias when reporting news of the conflict in the Middle East, deliberately maligning the Israelis whenever possible. This is an odious practice for any news organisation, but particularly so for one funded by the taxpayer and pledged to a policy of fair and impartial reporting.
There was no further response from the 大象传媒.
It is true that you cover your topics with depth. The only "minor" problem is that your "depth" is distinctly Left Wing biased, politically correct and anti Israeli to a fault. Now, you can't tell me that Israel represent nothing but evil and the Palestinians nothing but "angelic innocence". A fair and balanced approach may very well add credibility and moral viability to your one-dimensional efforts. Only than you may describe yourselves as a news reporting entity rather than a news creating (or altering) entity that you are.
With much love
Speedy Gonzales
Actually for the first time in a while the 大象传媒's reporting on conflict zones seems fairly appropriate and informative.
Unfortunately I despair that Jeremy Bowen is now back reporting from the region. Doubtless he will find a way to lay blame with Israel for the infighting of Palestinian militias.
Why isn't he at least open about the fact he despises Israel.
In response to greg,
1)Israelis don't tend to go round killing their own population.
2)Is terrorist activity by some Palestinians justified until the Israeli death tolls are equal to those of the Palestinans?
Your logic - I don't buy it!
FinanceDoc, while the points you raise are interesting, the evidence you present is at best thin. More pertinently, the question that Mr. Burnett raised was about 'too much coverage' and not about partisan coverage. And this is after acknowledging the fact 'disproportionate' coverage is a form of partisanship.
Secondly, the epitome that 大象传媒 reaches for, and please correct me Mr. Burnett if I am wrong here, is accuracy and not 'fair and balanced' (a much derided term here in US post its expropriation by Fox News Channel). It is reasonable to ask what does 'fairness' mean? And does balance mean equal coverage to every view point? I certainly do not subscribe to the notion that every view point deserves equal attention. That was a bit of straw manning and I am sure that you didn't intend the terms to be used in the way I use them above. You do raise an important question but what I believe is based on a flawed premise.
More broadly, the important thing for 大象传媒 to consider is to look at the bigger picture and rethink about the social utility of news - especially breaking news.
There are myriad ways to analyze the issue of whether 大象传媒 has had 'too much' Gaza coverage. One useful way would be to see how much of the tax payer's money goes into the Middle-East. This is not an easy figure to compute and certainly not the best guideline but it is a start in thinking harder about important questions like what issues to cover, how quickly you need to cover them, and the depth of coverage.
On Accuracy - it is but natural that 'breaking news' coverage will be based on shoddy reporting (relying on official reports) for there is just very little time to do a more thorough job. The pernicious effect of 'breaking news' is that the half-lies get the most attention while the corrigenda issued days later get little or no attention. This in itself introduces a significant bias towards official sources. I still shudder to think about the countless headline stories that WP ran during the Iraq War decrying latest 'finds' of Weapons of Mass Destruction.
Mr. Burnett - As I argued before, I think it is time we rethink the purpose of news. 大象传媒, which is mostly run on public money, has the incentive to look inwards more so. I would like to say one more thing - Analytical pieces should not be argument pieces for argument demands a certain coherence that reality often doesn't have. The purpose should be to apprehend major traits, causes, and effects.
Please continue to do the wonderful job that you do at 大象传媒. And certainly make time to improve.
My warmest regards and sincerest appreciation for this wonderful news organization.
Could it be that the events in Gaza have not turned out the way Edward Luttwak and those of his mindset had expected them to turn? There is no issue more important than the plight of the Palestinians and the more the light is shown on that region, and their plight, the more one hopes the lessons of the repercussions of playing with the rights of many in the pursuit of some misguided agenda will be shown. When one watches the manipulation of the lives of the Iraqis and the refugees interference in the destinies of others has created, ditto in Afghanistan were millions are still stranded in Pakistan, the nightmare that is being played out in Darfur, by those who would create a crisis, move peoples out of their villages and leave them stranded in the worst of places; all because they wish to exploit the natural resources of that region...One could go on and on, since this even was practiced in Louisiana, to move the blacks out of the 9th Ward so that the agenda of those who coverted that city could go forward unimpeded, makes one one wish the saga in Gaza to be played out in public, after all, where the Palestinians not removed from their ancestral land to make way for European Jews who claimed biblical rights to the land? Are we not being told that Hamas is establishing a Islamic state, quelle horreur, next to a divinely created Jewish state and thus must be isolated and from some of the talking heads appearing on 大象传媒News seen in the US Eastern region, starved, isolated and I guess annihilated??? Let us watch this as we watched the Strebenica and Sarejevo sagas unfold...It is an amazing time to be witnessing the double standard of the so called "civilized world" or another euphemism "the international community". Strange, one always remembers Haile Selassie's speech to the League of Nations when Italy was allowed by the League inspite of Selassie's magnificent speech, to do as it willed. "Until the philosophy that makes one man superior and another inferior, is permanently, and totally discredited and abandoned..." Bob Marley did a wonderful song titled "WAR" using that speech. At the present one side is winning, but for the Wheel to turn, there must be two alternate and opposite forces. The Great Work is equilibration. One cannot really look at the current state of the Microcosm and deem it equilibrated. So be it. Let the Wheel turn, keep focusing on Gaza/Hamas and in so doing, expose those who use others for their agendas.
It is important to extensively cover the situation in the Palestinian Territories and Israel, but you are in desperate need of some impartial reporting. Take the latest article:
Despite it's neutral title and initial approach, the entire article is meant to demonize Fatah ( and a little bit Israel while at it) and portray them as a second wave of Gaza occupiers( brutal, careless and violent) while Hamas is presented almost as the 'neighbourhood's community association' - which found itself oppresed and 'not surprisingly' had to snap back...
Not sure if your supportive attitude to Hamas is due to the "whatever is against Israel goes fine with us", but in the end, is the Palestinian's image and long term interest you are hurting.
Not to speak of the fact that you have outrageously moved from being informers of public news to targeted formers/shapers of public opinion.
The 大象传媒 coverage of the events in Gaza would not have to be so extensive if the previous coverage had not been so severely lacking.
The previous 大象传媒 stories mainly dealt with sob stories and pointing the finger at Israel.
There was seldom any analysis of the internal politics and events, which blossomed into this crisis.
Indeed, the clan structure of Palestinian society and its importance to Gaza politics was simply never discussed. Now one of the more powerful clans is holding Alan Johnston.
One must wonder why these people never appeared in Johnston's years of reporting. Was it purposeful, was it neglect, was it lack of editorial acuity?
It was the 大象传媒 reporting which left its audience unprepared for these events. that is because the 大象传媒 reporting departed from covering the reality of life, politics and culture in Gaza long, long ago.
The question that should be asked is not whether the coverage is too much but what kind of coverage it is.
Is it the same kind of biased coverage the 大象传媒 has been undertaking all of these years - seeing only the surface of a much deeper conflict of cultures ?
"The Muslims believe the West is biased in favour of Israel." Well, La-Di-Da, shouldn't this be the proper attitude - the democracies of the world supporting another democracy in peril... Well, in the case of Israel obviously not. With this kind of attitude don't be surprised to find the Muslim extrimists at your door -
Oh, sorry, you have already...