A commentary piece by an academic published in the Guardian contends that Israel has effectively managed to “spin” its messaging to subvert the media’s coverage of the conflict in Israel’s favor.
Our look at some of the media coverage of the Netanyahu speech illustrates how we are at the mercy of one or two journalists and editors or the particular editorial or political line of a media outlet when it comes to coverage of Israel.
Even the most well-meaning of journalists can get confused by the Arab-Israeli conflict’s complexities and historical details. A case in point is Fox News’ Leland Vittert.
Since Jerusalem was reunified in 1967, shopping malls and busy streets have replaced the barbed wire that once split the city in two. Yet the Media stubbornly cling to the notion that there are two separate cities of Jerusalem, East and West, and that the eastern half, including the Western Wall in the Old City, lacks Jewish legitimacy.
PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas engages in some historical revisionism in a NY Times op-ed.
A New York Times report on the latest flotilla is a shoddy piece of journalism, lacking in vital context, missing any Israeli comment and adopting the false narrative provided by anti-Israel activists well versed in manipulating the media for their cause.
An Israel that promotes progressive policies, in this case, gay-friendly ones, does not fit with the image of Israel that Time would prefer to you believe. And if such a positive image is the reality then better to attribute them to something far more sinister such as covering up for Israeli “crimes”.
A must-watch celebration of the diverse, exceptional and ordinary people — the often unseen faces — of Israel.
Why does the Financial Times cling to the previously accepted wisdom that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is the fulcrum at the heart of the Middle East’s troubles and consider Hamas a credible peace partner?
Take our quiz and see how well-informed you are about Hamas and Fatah coming together.