OMG, more proof pro-Israel media monitors are sometimes right
09/14/2010 - 18:01
James Besser

I've sometimes had issues with pro-Israel media “monitors” who have made a cottage industry of blasting every newspaper, TV outlet and Internet news site that doesn't cover the Middle East conflict to their satisfaction and provide extensive “context” to every story – which sometimes means slamming every story that doesn't agree with their own personal politics.

But I'm also driven totally crazy by media outlets that sometimes prove the monitors correct.

Jewish Week editor and publisher has already blogged about the scurrilous Time Magazine cover on “Why Israel Doesn't Care About Peace,” so I won't add my two cents except to say that it's hard to see how any professional editor could justify a headline that so dramatically misrepresented the actual content of a story.

I know times are tough in journalism, but I didn't realize they were promoting high-school newspaper editors to top jobs at Time.

Now there's a BBC fact sheet on the current Israeli-Palestinian negotiations that pretends to be a balanced, objective listing of the key concerns of the two sides and the United States.

Helpful, right? It's nice to know where everybody stands.

But the very first section, on Jerusalem, reveals that objectivity isn't what the editors had in mind.

Here's what they say about the Palestinians:

The Palestinians want East Jerusalem, which was controlled by Jordan before being captured by the Israelis in 1967, as the capital of a Palestinian state. The Old City contains the third holiest place in Islam, the al-Aqsa mosque, and the Dome of the Rock, from where Mohammed is said to have visited heaven on his winged steed Burak.

Here's what the BBC says about the Israel position:

The Israeli government is unwilling to divide Jerusalem, held to be the political and religious centre of the Jewish people. It stands by the 1980 basic Israeli law that "Jerusalem, complete and united, is the capital of Israel". In the past there has been room for manoeuvre on the margins. In talks in 2000 and 2007, the then Israeli governments proposed exchanging some outlying annexed districts.

Get it?

First: Jerusalem is “held to be (my italics) the political and religious center of the Jewish people” by the Israelis, suggesting a dubious claim, at best.

Then: Jerusalem “contains the third holiest place in Islam, the al-Aqsa mosque and the Dome of the Rock, from where Mohammed is said to have visited heaven on his winged steed Burak.”

Cool. But what about the ancient Jewish connection to the city? What about the Temple? The Western Wall?

Bottom line: Israel= stubborn, unreasonable, with unjustifiable claims to its own capital. The Palestinians: religious, reasonable, deeply connected to the city.

I've defended the BBC in the past on charges of flagrantly biased reporting about the Middle East, but this one is pretty hard to defend.

Biased reporting is biased reporting no matter what the nature and origin of the bias. All that features like this BBC gem do is provide aid and comfort to those who want to view the Middle East conflict and maddeningly complex issues like Jerusalem  strictly through the lens of ideology. And they boost those pro-Israel activists who say any negative information about Israel in the media is “bias.”

Comments

The BBC should be held to the highest standard because they have some influence in the English language news in Muslim countries. Here is today's example: "...Israel, its ever-expanding national boundaries,..." from: http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2010%5C09%5C22%5Cstory_22-9-2010_pg3_5
And let's not forget that the Palestinians' claim that Jerusalem is Islam's third holy site is a double lie: 1. up until the Six Day War when Israel seized East Jerusalem, the city was never mentioned as "third holy site" (as a matter of fact, it was completely ignored for centuries by the Arabs themselves), and 2. Mohammed never took off from the Temple Mount. All he did was DREAM that he flew on his winged horse toward "the farthest mosque", which could not have been in Jerusalem because it had not been not conquered yet by the Muslims at the time of the prophet's death. So who are they kidding? And finally, the best part: how many times is Jerusalem mentioned in the Bible: 667 times. In the Quran: 0 times (that's zero, none, nada). The Palestinians' claim over Jerusalem is completely bogus and must be ignored. Let them yelp as much as they want, they have no valid claim on it.
Hey anonymous...frack what the "rest of the world" acknowledges or doesn't acknowledge. And thanks for agreeing that ...it's certainly important".... There is no equality of competing claims as the only authoritative source clearly equates Jerusalem witn Jews. Swallow it and move on
Yes. It is "held to be" the political capital by the Israelis because the rest of the world strictly doesn't acknowledge it. Although I agree that it's certainly important to include that Jews and Christians hold legit religious claims over the city, just as Muslims do.

Comment Guidelines

The Jewish Week feels comments create a valuable conversation and wants to feature your thoughts on our website. To make everyone feel welcome, we won't publish comments that are profane, irrelevant, promotional or make personal attacks.

Add comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
By submitting this form, you accept the Mollom privacy policy.