Sophie McNeill has a history of advocacy journalism. She has openly dedicated herself to:
…frame stories from the point of view of the people who are “really suffering.”
McNeill made it clear that when she said “people who are really suffering,” she meant Palestinians. And while there’s nothing wrong with presenting one, agenda-driven side to a complex story, it is not journalism. It is activism. In fact, HonestReporting previously published an in-depth review of Sophie McNeill’s unsuitability to report actual news.
Which is why it is so disturbing that Australia’s ABC News employs a self proclaimed, and openly biased advocate to report from Israel and the Palestinian territories.
In fact, ABC News’s own ethical rules clearly require:
- Impartiality
- Balance that follows the weight of evidence;
- Fair treatment;
- Open-mindedness;
- A diversity of perspectives so that…no significant strand of thought or belief within the community is knowingly excluded or disproportionately represented;
- Not to unduly favour one perspective over another.
Is it really acceptable for McNeill to flagrantly violate the rules of her own employer?
Is it really acceptable for ABC News to publish the reports of someone who openly states that she intends to violate their ethical rules?
Slamming Israel
In her latest article, McNeill crafts a shameless piece of what is essentially Palestinian propaganda, disguised as news. She explores the difficulties of commuting from the West Bank into Israel, along with evocatively disturbing photos.
The commute involves passing through a checkpoint, which the article portrays as inconvenient, time consuming, and (in the opinion of Palestinian interviewees) also humiliating. While checkpoints do have a reputation for being not only a hardship for Palestinians, they are, sadly, a necessary evil when it comes to protecting Israeli lives.
Yet in an example of her continuing mission to put anti-Israel advocacy above professional journalism, McNeill avoids mentioning even one of the many, ongoing, present-day terror attacks against Israel.
In a transparent attempt to avoid accusations of unfairness, McNeill gives readers a pro forma reference to the “deadly second intifada,” and a partial quote from an unnamed “Israeli spokesperson” stating in a general way that Palestinians are “ trying to destroy the state of Israel.” That’s a total of 113 words: only 3.2% of her 3,506 word diatribe, which is chock full of in-depth interviews with many Palestinians, as well as statements from anti-Israel organizations.
Does this sound like balance or fairness?
Instead, McNeill refers to checkpoints as “collective punishment,” rather than a necessary attempt to save lives. She includes statements from numerous Palestinian interviewees such as this one:
We feel like animals. But these days not even animals get treated like this.
Yet she includes absolutely no Israeli response to these many, colorful accusations, leaving the reader with the unfair impression that they must be true.
They are not.
Checkpoints save lives
Failing to include relevant context, here’s some of the data Sophie McNeill didn’t share with her readers:
During the so-called “Second Intifada,” Palestinian terrorists killed an average of 200 Israelis per year, and injured thousands.
However, when Israel built a security barrier and began performing security checks on Palestinians entering Israel, Israeli deaths and injuries decreased by roughly 90%.
In short: checkpoints save lives.
McNeill’s article completely neglects the direct connection between Palestinian terror coming out of the West Bank today and the life-saving checkpoints that this terror continues to create, the numerous potential attacks that are stopped at checkpoints on a regular basis, the tremendous risk Israel takes by admitting Palestinians at all, and the enormous cost Israel has paid in the lives of its citizens.
Is it really so unreasonable that Israel would want to carefully check for security risks under such circumstances?
Just plain wrong
It is certainly fair for a journalist to explore the subjective experience of a Palestinian interviewee. It is even fair to investigate the very real burden that some checkpoints create in Palestinian daily life.
Yet hiding context, covering up inconvenient facts, disguising opinions as news, and utterly neglecting to include any balancing statements, clearly violates the professional standards of ABC News, as well as basic common sense.
Even worse: absolving Palestinians of all responsibility for a genuinely complex and dangerous situation, while utterly vilifying Israelis, is beyond unprofessional: it is just plain wrong.
According to Simon Plosker, Managing Editor of HonestReporting:
Sophie McNeill is a self-proclaimed political advocate, masquerading as a journalist, and ABC News Australia knowingly, and shamefully, has given her a platform in violation of their own ethical rules. McNeill openly states that her mission is to promote a Palestinian narrative at Israel’s expense, and this article is no exception: containing opinions disguised as news, lack of context and highly misleading commentary. The result is exactly the goal to which McNeill has dedicated her career: the utter vilification of Israel and of Israeli people, at the expense of actual journalism. In the end, it’s news readers who pay the price.
Please share your considered comments with Australia’s ABC News by contacting their Editor and filling in the form at THIS LINK.
If you would like to sign up to receive our special “Down Under” coverage, please do so below. You will still continue to receive our regular bulletins and the Israeli Daily News Stream (IDNS) if you are currently subscribed.
