HR Comment: How Moral Equivalence Erodes Accurate Reporting
April 13, 2011 15:48 by Alex Margolin
When Judge Richard Goldstone published his famous op-ed reconsidering the Goldstone Report, he – perhaps unintentionally – revealed one of the predominant biases of the Goldstone Committee that produced the report. The committee, it appears, was operating under a deep-set assumption of moral equivalence between Israel and Hamas.
The same bias of moral equivalence can be seen in the coverage of the recent violence between Israel and Hamas in Gaza.
While virtually all mainstream news outlets covered the story as an action-reaction, started by Hamas’s attack on an Israeli school bus and carried on by Israel’s retaliatory strikes on targets in Gaza, the coverage gives the misleading impression that Israel and Hamas are morally equal.
What’s left out of the coverage is the element of intentionality. More specifically, it glosses over the reality that Hamas’s intention was to kill Israeli school children and Israel’s intention, in firing back, was to defend its citizens.
The distinction between the two sides is most clearly evident when their intentions are examined. The original, flawed Goldstone Report, however, was so mired by the biases of its authors that no distinctions were made.
Even Goldstone now admits that there was no evidence pointing to any Israeli intention to target Palestinian civilians during the Gaza war. In the absence of evidence pointing clearly in either direction, his “reasonable conclusion” was to assume Israeli guilt:
That the crimes allegedly committed by Hamas were intentional goes without saying — its rockets were purposefully and indiscriminately aimed at civilian targets.
The allegations of intentionality by Israel were based on the deaths of and injuries to civilians in situations where our fact-finding mission had no evidence on which to draw any other reasonable conclusion.
In other words, the committee decided that since Palestinian civilians suffered, Israel targeted them on purpose unless it proved otherwise – just as Hamas intentionally targeted Israeli civilians.
Amazingly, the committee could not recognize that Israel’s sole intention for going to war in Gaza was to stop Hamas rocket fire targeting Israeli civilians. Had there been no rocket fire, there would have been no war.
But in a world of moral equivalence between aggressor and victim, intentions are irrelevant. Both sides fired and both sides caused civilian casualties. Therefore, both sides are morally equal.
This bias of moral equivalence – the failure to distinguish between Hamas’s intentional aggression against Israeli civilians, which “goes without saying” and Israel’s intention to protect its citizens against this aggression, for which there is apparently “no evidence” – is often reinforced in media coverage of the region.
As the violence escalated over the weekend, article after article focused on Israel’s retaliation to the trigger event – Hamas’s intentional attack on an Israeli school bus with an advanced anti-tank rocket.
This Associated Press article was typical of the coverage of the violence in Gaza:
Israel pounded Hamas targets in Gaza with air strikes and tank shells Saturday, killing four militants, Palestinian officials said, as Palestinian missiles reached deeper into Israel in the most intense round of fighting since the Gaza war.
In all, 18 Gazans have been killed and more than 65 wounded since Israel unleashed the strikes following a Hamas attack on an Israeli school bus Thursday. An anti-tank rocket struck the bus, seriously wounding a 16-year-old boy and injuring the driver.
It might seem reasonable to report, first and foremost, on casualties, especially when recounting the latest events. But a dry retelling of the actions without noting the intentionality behind them fails to convey the spirit of what happened.
Instead of presenting the events as Hamas intentionally attacking children on a school bus and Israel trying to prevent such attacks by pursuing those responsible, we get a play-by-play of the violence that has the strange ring of tit-for-tat attacks in a moral vacuum.
Time magazine even used the term tit-for-tat in its “teaser” – the one-line summary of the article – for its coverage of the Gaza flare-up.
The term suggests that all of the violence is essentially equal, as though Hamas’s intentions were irrelevant. In the AP article, it is Israel that “unleashed” strikes, as though the bus attack wasn’t really a trigger after all.
It is no wonder that people see the issue as a “cycle of violence.” When the media fails to make a distinction between Hamas’s aggression and Israel’s defense, it leaves out the essential element of the story that allows people to make sense of what’s happening.
But accurate reporting would show things as they truly are – with one side shooting precision missiles at school kids and firing rockets from within its own civilian population (see video below). Then people may understand there is no more equivalence between Israel and Hamas. Maybe even Goldstone is starting to see it.
PAthena
5:46 am
Apr 22, 2011
The only “Palestinians” are the Jews. Calling Arabs “Palestinians” is the consequence of the propaganda of Gamal Nasser, ruler of Egypt, and the Soviet Union, both haters of Jews, who in Cairo in 1964 invented the “Palestine Liberation Organization” with all the phony history that went with it.
The name “Palestine” was the name the Roman Emperor Hadrian gave to Judea in 135 A.D. when he defeated the last of the Jewish rebellions under Bar Kochba. (He also outlawed Judaism.) Since that time, “Palestine” meant “land of the Jews” or “the Holy Land,” and “Palestinian” meant “Jew.” Great Britain, for example, got the “Palestine Mandate” after World War I to be the “homeland of the Jews.”
The one and only reason the Arabs object to Israel is religious, the Arabs being Mohammedans and the majority of Israelis being Jews. The Arabs called “Palestinian” do not deserve a state, for there are plenty of Arab states around.
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
8 
0
Saad
6:03 am
Apr 22, 2011
Apparently Gandhi felt that the Palestinians were Arab and this in 1938:
Mahatma Gandhi on the “Jews In Palestine”
26-11-1938.
My sympathies are all with the Jews. I have known them intimately in South
Africa. Some of them became lifelong companions. Through these friends I
came to learn much of their age long persecution. They have been the
untouchables of Christianity.
…
But my sympathy does not blind me to the requirements of justice.
…
Palestine belongs to the Arabs in the same sense that England belongs to the English or France to the French. It is wrong and inhuman to impose the Jews on the Arabs. What is going on in Palestine today cannot be justified by any moral code of conduct. The mandates have no sanction but that of the last war. Surely it would be a crime against humanity to reduce the proud Arabs so that Palestine can be restored to the Jews partly or wholly as their national home. The nobler course would be to insist on a just treatment of
the Jews wherever they are born and bred. The Jews born in France are French in precisely the same sense that Christians born in France are French.
…
The Palestine of the Biblical conception is not a
geographical tract. It is in their hearts. But if they must look to the
Palestine of geography as their national home, it is wrong to enter it under
the shadow of the British gun. A religious act cannot be performed with the
aid of the bayonet or the bomb.
…
Let the Jews who claim to be the chosen race prove their title by choosing
the way of non-violence for vindicating their position on earth. Every
country is their home, including Palestine, not by aggression but by loving
service. A Jewish friend has sent me a book called The Jewish Contribution
to Civilization by Cecil Roth…
http://www.countercurrents.org/pa-gandhi170903.htm
Hot debate. What do you think?
1 
8
Sylvie Schapira
10:22 am
Apr 22, 2011
Saad, I have seen so many verses from the Koran that is, frankly, astonishing. I guess that such horrors should be relegated to the 6th century, but sadly they are still believed and taught today, which is what the Palestinian woman told me . This is the sorrow for people everywhere – Muslims for being taught such hate and the rest of mankind, especially Jews, for being the recipients. If you look on the web site for anything to do with hate and the Koran you can read such things. The following are just two examples.
Verse 5:60 even says that Allah transformed Jews of the past into apes and pigs. This is echoed by verses 7:166 and 2:65.
A hadith says that Muhammad believed rats to be “mutated Jews” (Bukhari 54:524, also confirmed by Sahih Muslim 7135 and 7136).
Perhaps you can shed some light on why intelligent people would want to imbue children with such prejudices; does it not occur to them that when children learn to hate they become damaged, aggressive, violent and murderous? Why would anyone want to cultivate the lowest and most negative of the human responses in their own children?
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
12 
2
Saad
3:52 pm
Apr 23, 2011
Sylivia, we were not discussing interpretations of various religious texts but rather the recent historical record. I am sure I can find similar interpretation in the Bible and Talmus but I prefer to dwell on people’s action. You stated that you heard some statement from some Palestinian woman claiming atrocious beliefs towards Jews but without attributing a name or context.
I responded with the historical record of how Muslims offered Jews shelter during the crusades and how the Arabs offered a peace deal which was neither accepted nor countered. I believe the historical record speaks more than personal anecdotes but you are free to believe what you will.
Hot debate. What do you think?
1 
9
Sylvie Schapira
4:32 pm
Apr 23, 2011
Saad, why do you deflect my questions? The religious texts that I quoted and you push away are the very same that cause the violence and hatred today from Palestinians (and Muslims in general). I wanted your opinions about it because you have chosen to put yourself in this forum and therefore you are the obvious person to ask. I think that a lot of Jews would want to know why these things are taught to Muslim children. And you are right, it is because of those indictments in the Koran that cause the actions you say you prefer to dwell on. Exactly so. You ask me about a Palestinian woman’s name. I don’t know why you want her name – and I would not break any confidances to give that to you, so don’t ask again.
You ‘respond’ with the historical record of how Muslims offered Jews shelter during the crusades. I am sure there were some who did this. There are always people who show their humanity to others in spite of the fears and threats around them. There were a very few Muslims who helped Jews during the Nazi Holocaust. As for historical records speaking more than personal anecdotes, that, I am afraid is not always the case. History can be manipulated and distorted. And sometimes personal stories have a deeper meaning.
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
10 
1
Saad
2:14 am
Apr 24, 2011
Then why are you not discussing the Talmud also? You seem to focus on one thing but fail to look at the actions (and inactions) by each side. Instead you focus on one anecdote without any collaboration and forget to look at any recent actions. Who was it that said don’t worry about what they say but worry about what they do?
Hot debate. What do you think?
1 
7
Scott
2:38 am
Apr 24, 2011
I would wager 999 out of 100 Jews has never seen The Talmud. The Koran?
Besides Saad you’re just obfuscating. Nabil Shaath just restated today, not 1,000 years ago that the Palestinians want a State, and they also want Israel. Again the Arab side refuses to negotiate and only demands everything.
http://www.jpost.com/MiddleEast/Article.aspx?id=217641
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
8 
1
PAthena
5:50 am
Apr 24, 2011
I own copies of both the Mishna, Talmud, and the Koran, thought I have not studied them carefully. There is a new book by Jacob Howland, Plato and the Talmud. Two other books of interest: (1) A.J. Jacobs, The Year of Living Biblically, a humorous account of how the author tried to live according to the Bible for a year; (2) Geza Vermes, Jesus the Jew (an other works by Vermes (he is an authority on the Dead Sea Scrolls).
Agree or Disagree:
1 
0
Carole
5:41 pm
Apr 24, 2011
Actions do speak louder than words!
We have plenty of muslims who carry out heinous attacks on Christians and Jews!
They also attack any member of the public who happens to be in the wrong place at the time when bombs are detonated etc.
The actions I mention above are going on as we speak around the world, see Islam: The Religion of Peace website for example!
Where are there any Christians and Jews committing this acts today?
Obviously, they do try to defend themselves such as the Israelis who try to take out the missile sites which the Gazans fire from or tunnels which store weaponry etc. and sometimes people get hurt in the process!
No, the so-called hatred which is going on as I state above is taught to children almost from kindergarten, they grow up with hatred in their hearts for all but muslims! It`s so sad!
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
7 
0
Saad
11:32 pm
Apr 24, 2011
Carol, I am not going to defend Muslims, Christians, Jews or Atheists. I am simply showing that some actions are not conducive to peace, just like PLO’s terrorism was also not conducive to peace.
Agree or Disagree:
0 
2
Tom
12:09 pm
Apr 25, 2011
Dear PAthena & Saad, I have read & do read Torah, Tennach ( the root of the commentaries ie. Talmud etc.) & The New Covenant with Israel (Jer.31.31) and parts of the Mischna & Koran, but when I read in the Koran where moslems are instructed to kill the people of The Book (Bible) – both Jews & Christians, then I dont need to bother much more with a book like that! Mohammed took from both Torah, Tennach and the words of Jesus and said he was the last Prophet, although Jesus is in the Koran, Jeesus said; I am the way, the truth, & the life, & that no one comes to God except throu Him, and that we should forgive our enemies! Mohammed said moslems should Kill! – I ask then if moslems accept Jesus in the Koran then – Why Dont They Do What He Says!?! Tom.
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
6 
0