[econoclectic] EclectEcon: Anti-Israel Bias of the Media

[Email subscription to blog articles]

Posted by EclectEcon:
Anti-Israel Bias of the Media
http://econoclectic.powerblogs.com/posts/1200056813.shtml


   The ledes of the coverage of George Bush's statements in the Middle
   East were truly horrid. From the opening paragraph in the coverage by
   [1]Washington Post,

     JERUSALEM, Jan. 10 -- President Bush said Thursday that Palestinian
     refugees should receive compensation for the loss of homes they
     fled or were forced to flee during the establishment of Israel and
     declared that there should be an end to Israel's "occupation" of
     lands seized in war four decades ago.

   Bush tied his remarks about ending the occupation to statements
   expressing concern for Israel's security. In fact, he expressed an
   understanding that so long as Israelis are experiencing rocket attacks
   and suicide (and other) bombings, there would good reasons for Israel
   not to want to pull back to the pre-1967 borders. But we see that only
   much later in the story:

     "These negotiations must ensure that Israel has secure, recognized
     and defensible borders."

   He also said,

     "I can also understand that until confidence is gained on both
     sides, why the Israelis would want there to be a sense of
     security."

   These are important qualifications to "end the occupation." The
   stories could just as easily have led with "Bush defends Israel's
   right to security," and have captured the essence of much of his
   speech.
   If I were an Israeli leader, I would say something like this:

     We, too, want peace in our land. We have tried time and again to
     negotiate a withdrawal from the west bank territories, but every
     time we reach an agreement, the arabs renege and our security is
     threatened once again. Until the rest of the world can guarantee
     our security, we must hang onto those territories and maintain the
     security fence.

   And as for compensation, keep in mind that most of the arabs who fled
   Israel nearly 60 years ago did so not out of fear of the Jews. They
   did so because the arab nations (in particular, Jordan, Syria, and
   Egypt) told them to leave, promising they would drive the Jews into
   the sea in a few days. I.e., don't blame Israel for most of the
   dislocations.
   I understand that paying compensation is probably preferable to the
   "right of return" that the region's arabs are demanding. But if there
   is to be compensation, make the surrounding arab nations pay it. And
   not just because of the bad advice they gave in 1948, but also because
   they refused to allow, much less encourage, the refugees to integrate
   into their new countries. But of course the western media don't
   mention these little items.
   For a solid analysis of Bush's speech and of the situation, [2]see
   this.
   For more on media anti-Israel bias, [3]see this about the BBC.

References

   1. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/10/AR2008011000311.html?wpisrc=newsletter
   2. http://www.theisraelproject.org/site/apps/nl/content2.asp?c=hsJPK0PIJpH&b=689705&ct=4927603
   3. http://www.spectator.co.uk/melaniephillips/441426/the-closed-thought-system-of-the-bbc.thtml