Post by Teddy Bear on Jan 6, 2009 0:47:50 GMT
Into the new year, but it's clear that the BBC has made no resolutions to redress their anti-Israeli bias. Honest Reporting comments on the following double standard displayed by the Beeb.
DOUBLE STANDARDS - PROVING OUR POINT
In all of the above cases, the media failed to verify Palestinian claims, placing ultimate trust in "Palestinian eyewitnesses" or so-called "human rights" organizations that are actually Palestinian advocacy groups. All too often the media is happy to accept, without question, the Palestinian version of the story. And yet, we never see the Palestinian narrative described as "propaganda".
The current conflict is also taking place on the airwaves, in the printed press and online. Israeli spokespeople have quite legitimately taken the initiative to get the message out during the Gaza operation. The effectiveness (particularly when compared with past operations) has itself created news stories in some media outlets.
But why does the BBC's Paul Reynolds consider the Israeli message to be "propaganda?" And why does he treat IDF video sources with such skepticism, particularly in stark contrast to Palestinian sources? Instead Reynolds states:
Why is this a "propaganda effort" and why should Israel have to justify defending its citizens against Hamas rocket attacks?
In all of the above cases, the media failed to verify Palestinian claims, placing ultimate trust in "Palestinian eyewitnesses" or so-called "human rights" organizations that are actually Palestinian advocacy groups. All too often the media is happy to accept, without question, the Palestinian version of the story. And yet, we never see the Palestinian narrative described as "propaganda".
The current conflict is also taking place on the airwaves, in the printed press and online. Israeli spokespeople have quite legitimately taken the initiative to get the message out during the Gaza operation. The effectiveness (particularly when compared with past operations) has itself created news stories in some media outlets.
But why does the BBC's Paul Reynolds consider the Israeli message to be "propaganda?" And why does he treat IDF video sources with such skepticism, particularly in stark contrast to Palestinian sources? Instead Reynolds states:
The Israeli propaganda effort is being directed to achieve two main aims.
The first is to justify the air attacks. The second is to show that there is no humanitarian calamity in Gaza.
Both these aims are intended to place Israel in a strong position internationally and to enable its diplomacy to act as an umbrella to fend off calls for a ceasefire while the military operation unfolds.
Israel has pursued the first aim by being very active in getting its story across that Hamas is to blame. The sight of Hamas rockets streaking into Israel has been helpful in this respect.
It has also allowed trucks in with food aid and has stressed that it will not let people starve, even if they go short.
Israel appears to think its efforts are working.
One of its spokespeople, who has regularly appeared on the international media, Major Avital Leibovich, said: "Quite a few outlets are very favourable to Israel."
Why is this a "propaganda effort" and why should Israel have to justify defending its citizens against Hamas rocket attacks?