NYT and the Perils of Mideast 'Balance'

"New York Times reporters Ethan Bronner and Sabrina Tavernise went to Gaza (2/4/09) to look into stories of civilian atrocities, and turned up some very powerful examples. Unfortunately, the impact of that reporting was undermined by the all-too-familiar tendency to "balance" these facts with criticisms of Palestinians. For a piece that is attempting to get a better sense of who's "version" of events is more accurate, the Times reveals its bias from the start, rendering a white phosphorous attack on a house as a "phosphorus smoke bomb," the qualifier "smoke" helpfully suggesting that the bomb, which accidentally incinerated most of a family in their home, was being used legally as a smoke screen. The Times underlines this point in the second graph by noting that the bomb was "intended to mask troop movements outside." According to whom? That claim is stated is as a fact, with no attribution."
1 commentscategory: The World

comments

  1. #1    One of the most insightful articles on Israel/Palestine I've read recently pointed out that the best intentions are always assumed on the part of the Israelis, but the intentions of Palestinians are always assumed to be the worst possible ones. If Israel drops a bomb on a house with a family in it, that's justified by the intent, which was (we are told) only to hurt one person in the house. If Gazans use a tunnel to smuggle goods during a blockade, it's assumed that the intent is to smuggle arms - even though the recent war showed that Hamas had little by way of arms.
    written by epppie since 369 days 23 hours 39 minutesepppie
closed comments

who are we
code: license, download  |  images license
Valid XHTML 1.0 Transitional    Valid CSS!   [Valid RSS]