Gilad Shalit Comes Home in the Eye of the Media
October 19, 2011 11:59 by Simon Plosker
Gilad Shalit (Photo: IDF)
After over five years in captivity, Gilad Shalit was finally reunited with his family on Israeli soil as part of a deal that saw hundreds of Palestinian prisoners, including many responsible for heinous and deadly acts of terror, released.
A LOW POINT FOR ETHICAL COVERAGE
From the Israeli side, the main news networks had agreed to handle the story sensitively by keeping their distance from the Shalit home and avoiding invasive photography. Indeed, the blanket coverage on Israeli television was a drip feed of carefully controlled IDF footage and images of the newly released Shalit.
Prior to that, however, as Shalit was released into Egyptian custody, ethical journalism went out of the window as a bewildered and tired looking Shalit, after 5 years in isolation, found himself in front of an Egyptian TV camera for an interview with newswoman Shahira Amin.
Amin has come under intense fire from Israel for conducting an interview under such circumstances, criticism that she has rejected. Was Shalit forced to give the interview? Not according to Amin:
It’s true that he was brought in by armed Hamas men, but in the room itself there were only Egyptian intelligence people. They didn’t intervene, and neither did the Hamas men. I say this with complete authority and responsibility: I asked Gilad if he was willing to be interviewed and he said he was. If he’d answered that he didn’t, I wouldn’t have conducted the interview. He seemed pale and exhausted, it’s true, but at the same time he seemed happy that he was going home, and gave good answers. Personally I would have preferred the interview to be in English, without the translator, but Gilad preferred to speak in Hebrew.
Could Shalit possibly have agreed to be interviewed so readily due to the presence of a masked Hamas operative in the room?
As for the interview itself, the Jerusalem Post gives some analysis:
“During all that time of captivity, you did just one video to tell the world and your family that you’re alive,” she tells the soldier. “Why just once? Why didn’t it happen again?”Rather than letting him answer, however, Schalit’s Hamas minder-cum-interpreter scolds Amin for asking the same question twice (a peculiar accusation, given the footage shows the question hadn’t been asked before).
The resulting argument between interviewer and minder is one of the interview’s more regrettable scenes. Amin says Schalit appears unwell, and “that’s why I’m asking the question again” – as if drilling him repeatedly will have a salutary effect. The question is itself absurd, roughly tantamount to asking a hostage victim why he or she didn’t escape sooner.
. . .
Amin proceeds to ask Schalit what “lessons” he learned in captivity. After asking for the question to be repeated, he says he believes a deal could have been reached sooner. Here the Hamas minder renders his response as praise for reaching a deal “in such short time” – a mistranslation repeated by the BBC’s own real-time interpreter.
“Gilad, you know what it’s like to be in captivity,” Amin continues as the painful charade drags on. “There are more than 4,000 Palestinians still languishing in Israeli jails. Will you help campaign for their release?”
Schalit’s answer, after a few seconds’ stunned silence, is superior: “I’d be very happy if they were released,” he says, then adds the caveat, “provided they don’t return to fighting Israel.”
Again, the Egyptian interpreter fails to translate the sentence’s second clause, and again the omission is repeated by the BBC’s interpreter, though he too was apparently translating from Hebrew in real-time.
“I will be very happy for the prisoners to go free, so that they can be able to go back to their families, loved ones and territory. It will give me great happiness if this happens,” the BBC’s interpreter relays.
And shame on those members of the international press such as the LA Times, which failed to adequately check the translation before repeating Shalit’s mistranslated words:
Asked whether he would work to help secure the release of other Palestinian prisoners held in Israeli jails, Shalit said he would be happy to see them reunited with their families and that he hoped the spirit of cooperation that led to his release would continue between Israelis and Palestinians.
Lasting ten painful minutes for a visibly strained Shalit, the interview delayed his return to Israel and marks a new low point in the media’s need for instant gratification regardless of the cost.
PALESTINE PIE IN THE SKY
Just what is going on at Sky News? Only days ago HonestReporting flagged its coverage, since corrected, that wrongly stated that Shalit had been captured in Gaza. (He was, of course, kidnapped on Israeli soil.) Now, in another blunder, Sky reports:
Putting to one side the argument over whether the term “Palestine” should even be part of the accepted lexicon, in this case, the term is utterly wrong. It wasn’t “Palestine” or even the Palestinian Authority that Israel agreed the deal with. It was Hamas, which certainly cannot claim to represent “Palestine” and governs only the Gaza Strip.
This error was also repeated by The New Statesman, perhaps less of a surprise given that the publication is under the editorship of Islamist Mehdi Hasan.
A SICK SYMMETRY
The Guardian reports:
Families wept as they embraced. Children who had no memories of their fathers were held up to be kissed. But some of the freed prisoners seemed most intent on embracing mothers who wailed with joy.
The reaction across the Gaza Strip and the West Bank as hundreds of jailed Palestinians returned home, or at least left their prison cells, was not so different from the matching emotions in Israel at the release of just one man.
Actually, the emotions displayed by some Palestinians did not match those of Israelis. Perhaps The Guardian’s Chris McGreal would have changed his teary-eyed tune had he also reported on events at the Hamas-organized welcome home event in Gaza, as described in The Daily Telegraph, amongst others:
But outside, the crowd – now 100,000 strong – was in full voice, chanting in unison: “We want another Gilad, we want another Gilad.” Such scenes will have done little to boost the reputation of Gaza’s Palestinian population in international eyes. Some admitted that the spectacle was unedifying, even distasteful – but insisted that they had no choice.
Despite all of the above, Israel and every decent human being can breathe a collective sigh of relief. Gilad Shalit, a young man deprived of his freedom for over five years without even a visit from the Red Cross, is back where he belongs. Welcome home Gilad.
Josephine Bacon
3:51 pm
Oct 19, 2011
I heard the poor English interpretation of Shalit’s answers, performed by a male whose mother tongue was clearly neither English nor Hebrew and the bullying tone of the Hebrew “interpreter” (I am sure Shalit understands English perfectly well, his parents are British!). The Hebrew interpreter also added his own words to both the interviewer’s words and those of Shalit. I had offered my services to both the BBC and Sky to interpret (as I have so often done before) but they ignored me.
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
59 
4
John Leith
4:25 pm
Oct 19, 2011
The BBC’s domestic coverage, fronted by Middle East editor Jeremy Bowen, gave far more time to the release of Palestinian prisoners and the rejoicings in Gaza than it did to what should have been the focus of their coverage, the release of Gilad Shalit. I could hardly bear to watch such biased reporting and commentary.
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
59 
1
Debbie UK
6:43 pm
Oct 19, 2011
I feel the Israeli army has a duty of care to their soldiers. They are conscripts, not voluntary servicemen. How can the army expect loyalty if the solidier’s do not believe that everything possible will be done to rescue them, should the situation arise. I do not think the price paid for Gilad’s release was too high.
As for the BBC’s coverage with Jeremy Bowen – he makes my blood boil! As mentioned above, very little time was given to Gilad’s release – and then his final piece to camera – he said “Well Gilad Shalit will sleep peacefully in his own bed tonight – how long will it be before the Palestinians can sleep peacefully?” As if the two situations are remotely comparable!! (I thought Sky’s coverage was actually pretty fair mostly).
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
15 
1
Rainer Merkava
4:43 pm
Oct 19, 2011
There is better coverage than that: the famous, widely read German Weblog “Politically Incorrect” worked hard on bringing a substantial background counter op-ed on the matter (in German – simply translate with google):
http://www.pi-news.net/2011/10/gilad-schalit-ist-frei-freude-und-die-kehrseite/#more-216563
Agree or Disagree:
0 
0
Gad
4:46 pm
Oct 19, 2011
I still have a tough time dealing with the terminology used by the Press. A prisoner swap 1 for 1027! Lets make it perfectly clear, these were individuals who committed crimes and were judged and handed sentenses based on the legal system, the Israeli solder was kidnapned and detained for no legal reason. Well at least they kept him in one piece, thank god for that!
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
56 
0
Rainer Merkava
4:47 pm
Oct 19, 2011
Is “moderation” the usual euphemism for censorship also with Honest Reporting?
I thought YOU would do better
Chag Simchat Torah Sameach!
Agree or Disagree:
0 
0
Aliza Tamara Lowell
4:53 pm
Oct 19, 2011
What else could we expect from Pallywood?
The only thing that shocks me is that the rest of the wold willingly goes with the lies, the Palestinian narrative. It is so disguising!
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
34 
0
RichyUK
4:56 pm
Oct 19, 2011
I certainly thought the handling on the BBC was (as usual) deliberately one-sided. But, the main thing is that, at last, Gilad is home, safe in Israel. Interestingly, I didn’t hear one single report about how well-fed and healthy looking the released murderers seemed to appear compared to Gilad who looked a sorrowful, sad shadow of his former self. Doesn’t that say something about the double standards of the people who control Gaza?
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
51 
0
steve mann
5:02 pm
Oct 19, 2011
I have come to expect nothing less from the UK press (with minor exceptions) .
When the BBC publish the Balen report- When the Guardian on line allow me back on to put Israels side against the overwhelming anti-Zionist bloggers-
When the rest of the media stop being afraid of these Jihadists- and start beng even handed.
Then we might see justice-
Or maybe we might have to wait for the Moshiach.
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
26 
0
Eddie
5:27 pm
Oct 19, 2011
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Agree or Disagree:
1 
13
RichyUK
5:39 pm
Oct 19, 2011
I’m sorry Eddie but one Jewish life is worth a million of those B_s___ds. Virtually everyone in Israel has done their national service like Gilad so everyone felt the pain of his incarceration.
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
11 
1
Eric
5:29 pm
Oct 19, 2011
I also found it odd that none of the evening news broadcasts in Los Angeles even mentioned one word about Gilad’s release. I watched three different stations and nothing….
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
10 
0
joanne
8:27 pm
Oct 19, 2011
Hey…we live in LA. Look how poorly the LA Times does with articles on Israel. They were busy putting that Kabbalah rabbi that the IRS was looking into on the front page the other day, when he should have been in the California section.
Amazing when the Jews do so much for the culture of this city.
Agree or Disagree:
1 
0
Clinton Nauert
5:30 pm
Oct 19, 2011
I believe the swap was too “one-sided” — If the swap had taken place on more biblical terms the Hamas would have gotten 10,000 for 1 Hebrew — then the world could have seen the true value of the Children of Israel, then truth would have shown forth.
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
11 
0
Leonard Kahn
5:37 pm
Oct 19, 2011
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Agree or Disagree:
1 
11
Nigel Blumenthal
5:40 pm
Oct 19, 2011
One interesting side-effect of this whole affair is that, at last, we have a definition of “proportionality”. Hamas has established the exchange rate: 1,027 Palestinians for one Israeli. So the next time there is some sort of attack in Israel (and I’m sorry to say that I’m sure there will be a next time, despite all the precautions), it will be perfectly OK to bomb, say, 100 Palestinian homes for every Israeli killed. If some of those homes have fewer than ten people in them, hey – that’s a discount on the agreed exchange rate. And the world, or the UN, will just have to suck it up – the Palestinians set the conversion rate.
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
28 
0
TucsonTerpFan
6:13 pm
Oct 19, 2011
I’m happy that this young man is free, but I really have concerns about the policy of trading one soldier for a thousand terrorists. I fear this action will only result in more of the same.
However, another perspective tells me that this one Israeli soldier is worth far more than these 1,027 pieces of scum. In the end, there will be judgement to those who have killed in the name of terror from a source far greater than any of us.
All soldiers know that the risk of death is always a part of being in the service. (I spent 22 years in the US military; however, most days that fear was far from the surface, but it was always there.)
Again, I’m glad Gilad Shalit is home safe!
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
11 
0
Andrew Hurley
12:37 am
Oct 20, 2011
Quote: “this one Israeli soldier is worth far more than these 1,027 pieces of scum” – somehow I feel that being part of Honest Reporting could be a mistake, as an un-edited comment like this shows. Are these people being released really ‘scum’? Aren’t they people just like you and me made in the image of God? Many of these ex-prisoners have committed murder, they are guilty until they repent, in prison or out of prison, but we are just as guilty of murder if we think that any person is un-redeemable and ‘scum’.
Agree or Disagree:
1 
2
Ethan D.
7:01 pm
Oct 19, 2011
What do you expect from an oppressed arab woman that gets beaten everyday and treated like garbage (which she is anyways). And her stupid arab accent made me want to throw up.
But let’s not forget – she in an arab – another undesirable specie on earth.
Agree or Disagree:
4 
1
F.P.O'Donnell
7:21 pm
Oct 19, 2011
It was notable how the released Palestine prisoners looked remarkably healthy and well fed compared to the deliberately undernourished Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit.
Surely a testimony to Israels humanitarian policies that they could feed so many of their avowed enemies, while Hamas deliberately starved one prisoner.
I wonder if any of the media picked up on this….Somehow I doubt it.
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
24 
0
Gilad Shalit Comes Home in the Eye of the Media « THE BLACK KETTLE
8:30 pm
Oct 19, 2011
[...] MORE GA_googleAddAttr("AdOpt", "1"); GA_googleAddAttr("Origin", "other"); GA_googleAddAttr("theme_bg", "e6e6e6"); GA_googleAddAttr("theme_text", "333333"); GA_googleAddAttr("theme_link", "226699"); GA_googleAddAttr("theme_border", "AABBBB"); GA_googleAddAttr("theme_url", "649DC9"); GA_googleAddAttr("LangId", "1"); GA_googleFillSlot("wpcom_sharethrough"); Rate this: Share this:FacebookTwitterDiggLinkedInRedditStumbleUponEmailPrintLike this:LikeBe the first to like this post. [...]
Agree or Disagree:
0 
0
Gill
9:26 pm
Oct 19, 2011
I am happy Gilad is home, however I am sad that Israel released all these terrorists, I dont think there is right or wrong. Any parent would love to see their captured son coming home, on the other hand any family who lost a loved one in a terrorist act woulld hate to see these terrorists released. Can you imagine if a U.S soldier was captured overseas, and the U.S agreed to release all these prisoners from Guantanamo Bay who are tied to Al Qaeda for a swap?
Agree or Disagree:
1 
0
Gilad Shalits Heimkehr: Wie die Medien reagierten « Medien BackSpin
9:40 pm
Oct 19, 2011
[...] HonestReporting Media BackSpin, 19. Oktober 2011 [...]
Agree or Disagree:
0 
0
juan
9:56 pm
Oct 19, 2011
How can I put it?
I am glad Shalit is safe and back. Extremely glad.
But I am angry, shocked and frustrated that one thousand murderers or collaborators in murder have been set free.
Agree or Disagree:
1 
0