Tuesday, September 7 2010

UPDATE Wed. Sept 8: Tuvia Grossman and HonestReporting's Simon Plosker discussed fauxtography and HR's founding with the Jerusalem Post. 

In the interview, Tuvia referred to an Egyptian web site that misrepresented his image, depicting him as a Palestinian. That web site, www.islam.net, removed the poster, but not before we got a screen grab. It illustrates (literally and figuratively) Tuvia's main point:

“Even though the Times printed a correction, cousins of mine witnessing a pro-Palestinian rally in Sao Paulo, Brazil noticed demonstrators holding up posters of me to demonstrate Israeli brutality,” he quips. “There are always going to be people who saw original and but did not see correction.”

It's now known that the Second Intifada began when the Camp David talks broke down.

But my reference point for bloody wave of terror's kick off was the savage beating of Tuvia Grossman by a Palestinian mob outside Damascus Gate. He was saved by a group of soldiers. AP dramatically immortalized the moment by describing the bloodied student as a Palestinian beaten by the soldier on the Temple Mount.

The incident happened on the eve of Rosh HaShanah, the Jewish new year. A day later, images of another boy -- Mohammed al-Dura -- were beamed into televisions around the world. All hell broke loose as suicide bombers, gunmen and rocket squads targeted Israelis for years. On the Jewish calendar, the anniversary is now.

The foreign press corps, which works according to the English calendar, will presumably note the important 10th anniversaries closer to the end of September. Anniversaries provide journalists with opportunities to look back on events; when the period of time is only a decade old, the incidents are recent enough to be relevant to news readers, but far enough back in time that reporters can look at events in a larger context.

This is when events begin moving from "history's first draft" mode to "history." So journalists plan out their coverage well ahead of time.

I presume that towards the end of September, we'll begin seeing some lookbacks that may touch on issues like the failed summit, Ariel Sharon's visit to the Temple Mount, Mohammed Dura, the Ramallah lynch, Operation Defensive Shield, "Jeningrad," the Church of the Nativity exiles, Sderot under rocket fire, the most memorable suicide bombings, and more.

We may see commentary and analysis assessing Israeli security measures, Palestinian leadership, and the international response to the conflict and other issues. Perhaps unexpected new revelations will surface too. That sometimes happens on these anniversaries.

- I hope anniversary coverage includes appropriate followup on overlooked Israeli victims who survived Palestinian terror attacks, went through rehab and moved on with their lives.

- I hope anniversary narratives don't become a political issue between Israeli and Palestinian peace negotiators.

- I especially hope that Sept. 30 (Dura's anniversary on the English calendar) doesn't devolve into ugly day of rage -- on the streets or in the press.

I won't speculate on how Fatah and Hamas might mark their red letter dates. Don't expect any Israeli commemorations or P.R. initiatives. Israelis still view the Second Intifada as a wound not worth reopening.

Will we find that history's first draft of intifada is still too contentious? Or will we find hard national narratives starting to soften? And how will all this reflect on the media watchdogging and web activism of HonestReporting, bloggers and Israel's other supporters?

Just some thoughts as we enter a new year.

Shana tova to all our readers. I'll resume blogging on Sunday.

Posted at 05:49 PM
Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0)

Yarden and I discuss AP's inappropriate and irrelevant "illustrations" from last week's fatal roadside shooting.

Posted at 05:12 PM
Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Reporter Karl Vick defends his controversial cover story in Time magazine. He tells CNN's Kevin Flowers:

Vick, who was recently assigned to Jerusalem says the cover headline for the story was "meant to be provocative and intrigue" but defended the reporting. "There is always debate and criticism of anything that challenges conventional wisdom" he said.

"It was apparent to me that life here is really good and when security is good there is no urgency."

Vick still confuses Israel's jaded views on the peace process with disinterest in the overall goal of peace.

That nuance is why the Jewish world is outraged with Time, and not with Yossi Klein Halevi and the LA Times over a commentary similarly titled:

Israelis Do Not Have High Hopes in Peace Talks

You can read HonestReporting's response to Time by clicking here, or by clicking on the link Flowers cited in the CNN post.

Posted at 02:43 PM
Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

After a judge convicted an Arab man of "rape by deception" in July, liberal commentators jumped all over Israel.

Andrew Sullivan, in particular, said the ruling was "about racism, religion and the risk of miscegenation." Reader comments on The Lede, and the Daily Kos further browbeat Israel, while The Guardian gave Saber Kushour a soapbox to share with the world how the conviction "ruined his life."

But newly released court documents are turning all the accusations on their head. I'll let Maan News sum up the newest revelations:

The Israeli weekly magazine HaIr on Friday published testimony given in court by the complainant.

Kushur was initially charged with rape by force, and the conviction of "rape by deceit" was a plea bargain formulated and agreed to by the prosecution and defense. According to the report in HaIr, Kushur's lawyers initiated the "rape by deceit" charge.

After the conviction, Israeli press reports on the court's verdict were quickly picked up by the international media, which cited the court's decision as an example of discrimination against Israel’s Arab citizens . . .

According to the report, the initial rape charge was reduced to "rape by deceit" to avoid further traumatizing the woman, who had come under aggressive questioning about her history of being sexual abused, and her former occupation as a sex worker.

Other than the JTA , Maan News, and a Haaretz commentary, I haven't seen any mainstream English papers pick up on the story yet. The MSM needs to update the record. Otherwise, they're partners in a deception that allowed Israel to be raped in the court of public opinion.

(Hat tip: Victor Shikhman)

Posted at 12:02 PM
Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0)

Monday, September 6 2010

Time cover story claims decadent Israelis no longer care about peace.

See HonestReporting's latest communique: Why Time Doesn't Care About Israel

Posted at 08:57 PM
Permalink | Comments (30) | TrackBack (0)

It's been awhile since I've seen the media refer to Prime Minister Netanyahu with terms like "hawkish" or "hardliner." In fact, it's worth asking if the media's starting to make a U-turn on Bibi. Here's what's making my antennae twitch:

Exhibit A: Newsweek's Dan Ephron:

Recognizing the advantages of secret talks, Netanyahu has tried several times during the past year to interest Palestinians in a back channel, according to an Israeli official who has worked alongside Netanyahu for much of his current term. In secret, the strategy was for Netanyahu to offer concessions and gauge the Palestinian willingness to bend—without the risk of losing his coalition. If an agreement did appear possible, he could go public with the outline and put it to a referendum or even call a snap election. The Israeli official told me he thought Netanyahu might possibly be willing to risk his coalition for the prospect of having his name attached to a historic peace agreement. But he would not be willing to risk it merely to engage the other side.

Palestinians repeatedly turned down the offer, the Israeli source said. A Palestinian official confirmed the account . . .

Exhibit B: Haaretz columnist Aluf Benn:

The current Netanyahu government is the most dovish Israel has seen since Yitzhak Rabin was assassinated. The right-wing leader is displaying far more restraint than his predecessors in using the army and in expanding the settlements. He supports the establishment of a Palestinian state alongside Israel and is now returning to negotiations on a final-status agreement.

Exhibit C: Aluf Benn again, this time in the Washington Post:

Ten months ago, Netanyahu told me in a phone interview for Haaretz, the liberal Israeli daily where I am a columnist and editor: "I want to promote a peace agreement with the Palestinians. I can bring a deal." I wrote afterward that I believed him, only to receive mocking comments from many readers who called me naive. But I have not changed my mind -- and neither has Netanyahu.

Exhibit D: Yesterday's Sunday Times reported the PM is seriously mulling a referendum on withdrawing from the West Bank:

“Withdrawal from the West Bank, the core of Judaism, is the most difficult decision any Israeli PM has ever made,” said a close aide. “To make this work, Bibi [Netanyahu] must get overwhelming support from the Israelis in the form of a referendum.”

Exhibit E: The Independent. The UK paper wouldn't ask this question for nothing:

Is Netanyahu ready to make peace? The test is yet to come

Posted at 01:28 PM
Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0)

Sunday, September 5 2010

HonestReporting's social media editor, Alex Margolin, contributes occasional posts on social media issues. He oversees HonestReporting on Facebook.

People who spend a lot of time on the Internet, particularly on social media sites, often refer to the entire phenomenon of user-generated content as “The Conversation.”

What they're referring to, in most cases, is the ability for people to post content they like on numerous forums, such as blogs, Facebook or YouTube, and for other people to respond to it without filters or editors.

That conversational quality, a by-product of the democratization of the Internet, is one of social media’s greatest contributions to mass media.

But lately, there's been a great deal of, well . . . conversation online about whether there really is any conversation taking place at these forums.

Social media marketer Mitch Joel, a leading advocate for social media as a space for direct, person-to-person communication, recently wrote a highly provocative blog post titled The End of Conversation in Social Media, arguing that what most people do online – post Facebook status updates, tweets, comments – doesn't amount to personal engagement.

Looking at the various social media platforms, Joel concludes:

. . . the majority of "conversation" I have come across is nothing more than the posting of a thought with very little engagement beyond that.

Joel's right that there is little direct back-and-forth between individuals on the Internet. But he's wrong that there's little engagement.

In fact, there's almost nothing else. The engagement takes place over the giant scope of social media. It's not only between people but also between people and ideas, with many people contributing thoughts on similar topics. People read blogs and, instead of leaving a comment, respond with their own blog post on the subject. People create and share a massive amount of content each day in response to what others created one day earlier.

Their response isn't directed solely at an individual, but at everyone else interested in the idea.

It's wrong to expect the Internet to function as a telephone line between individuals. Social media is something new in the annals of media – instead of one-to-one, social media is one-to-many communication. How the many respond will vary from individual to individual.

That’s why the entire phenomenon is called “The Conversation.” It's all around us. Ideas are debated, reconstructed, and ultimately, advanced. Some are rejected. But everyone can add their voice to the conversation.

Or, as Lisa Hickey said in a comment to Joel’s post,

It's not just "back and forth" that defines conversation these days, it's "here, there, everywhere."

Previously in Alex's series: Google: Gaming on Gaza

Posted at 08:55 AM
Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0)

Thursday, September 2 2010

Via Romenesko, Gawker obtained a NY Times memo indicating the Gray Lady is cracking down on anonymous sources.

Editors rightfully want to restore credibility by shedding light for readers on why a source isn't sharing info by name.

Here's a Top 10 List of Conditions of Anonymity I'd like to see in Mideast coverage.

10. The Gaza resident spoke on condition of anonymity because public criticism of Hamas will get him killed.

9. The Israeli negotiator spoke on condition of anonymity because he wasn't authorized to speak on such matters, and this journalist really needs to attribute these views to someone.

8. The Fatah cadre spoke on condition of anonymity because he didn't want to draw attention to his superfluous position and bloated salary.

7. The Hamas official spoke anonymously for fear of sending a message conflicting with higher echelon figures who haven't decided the party line.

6. A foreign aid worker afraid of being branded a Mossad spy spoke on condition of anonymity.

5. The White House figure spoke anonymously because it's the accepted practice of raising trial balloons.

4. The UN official said spoke anonymously because her comments aren't politically correct within her agency.

3. The ministry official spoke on condition of anonymity because he's not privvy to anything important but likes impressing reporters.

2. The Palestinian medical worker spoke on condition of anonymity because he's not authorized to disclose accurate casualty figures.

1. The Israeli politician spoke on condition of anonymity because the time isn't ripe to backstab coalition partners.

Posted at 04:01 PM
Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0)

Israelis don't care about peace. That's the conclusion Time magazine reporter Karl Vick would have us believe after quoting two Tel Aviv condo salesmen (and nobody else):

"The people," Heli says, "don't believe." Eli searches for a word. "People in Israel are indifferent," he decides. "They don't care if there's going to be war. They don't care if there's going to be peace. They don't care. They live in the day."

I'm guessing that Vick did talk to other Israelis -- who were dropped from web site's abridged version. Time wants you to pay for the magazine or their iPad app to read the whole story. It's even noted at the bottom of the page that story's abridged. Fair enough.

But it appears that Time cut so much that what's left online no longer supports the original headline's thesis:

Posted at 11:49 AM
Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0)

Wednesday, September 1 2010

Credit where credit is due. AP and Reuters got photos of Palestinian kids morbidly celebrating the roadside shooting that killed Talya and Yitzhak Imes, Kochava Even-Haim, and Avishai Shendler.

Palestinian children, waving green Islamic flags and making a victory sign, participate a rally, to celebrate a militant attack in the southern West Bank, in the Jebaliya Refugee camp in the northern Gaza Strip, Tuesday, Aug. 31, 2010. A Palestinian gunman opened fire on an Israeli vehicle traveling in the West Bank on Tuesday, killing four passengers, authorities said, in a deadly attack that cast a long shadow over Mideast peace talks set to start this week (AP Photo/Hatem Moussa)

Those images, plus photos like these, are far more relevant to the story than the disgraceful illustrations AP photo editors sent last night.

Posted at 11:44 AM
Permalink | Comments (4) | TrackBack (0)

Palestinian media activist Ali Abunimah provides a great moment in playing blame-the-victim game:

See here for more about his appalling take on Israelis killed by Palestinian terror.

Posted at 10:29 AM
Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0)

Tuesday, August 31 2010

Four Israelis, including a pregnant woman, were killed in roadside shooting tonight near Hebron tonight.

Photojournalists can be forgiven for not reaching terror scenes on a moment's notice. But judge for yourself the how appropriate or relevant these AP illustrations for the attack are.

A Palestian man walks near a section of Israel's separation barrier in the West Bank town of Bethlehem, Tuesday, Aug. 31, 2010. A Palestinian gunman opened fire on an Israeli vehicle traveling in the West Bank on Tuesday, authorities said, killing four passengers in a deadly attack that cast a long shadow over Mideast peace talks set to start this week. (AP Photo/Bernat Armangue)

I'm blaming AP's photo editors for this. Bernat Armangue's photos were taken during the day, hours before the attack happened.

Posted at 10:25 PM
Permalink | Comments (5) | TrackBack (0)