Los Angeles Times In-Depth Analysis
December 24, 2012 12:02 by Yarden Frankl3. Direct Quotations: Majority critical of Israeli actions / leaders.
Direct quotations can have a huge impact on the weight of a story. The LA Times tends to use quotations — from both Palestinians and Israelis — that are critical of Israeli actions. While there is an occasional story where a Palestinian is quoted criticizing the Palestinian Authority or Hamas, these are few and far between. Does this mean that there is no criticism? Or can the lack of quotes be because in general, Palestinians are wary of going on record to criticize the PA or Hamas for fear of repercussions?
Examples of direct quotations favoring Palestinian side / critical of Israel:
i) “They are killing us and then forcing us to pay for it, too,” Natche said. “The courts are racist and we knew what the decision would be from the start.” - Palestinians evicted from two East Jerusalem houses, April 18, 2012
ii) “A victory for righteousness, justice and humanitarian principles.”
Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Salam Fayyad on UNESCO’s vote to include holy sites in the biblical city of Bethlehem on the World Heritage list, despite Israel’s objections. - Palestinians hail World Heritage listing of Bethlehem holy sites, June 29, 2012
iii) “The documents show that Israel used its control to put pressure on the Hamas regime by making civilians suffer.” - Sari Bashi, director of the Israeli group Gisha, Israeli military calculated caloric needs of Gazans during embargo, October 17, 2012
iv) Peace Now accused the government of making “a mockery of the rule of law” by allowing “a radical minority” to create facts on the ground and undermine a possible future agreement with the Palestinians. - Two new settler outposts go up in West Bank, activists report, October 31, 2012
4. Headlines: Four times more likely to reflect negatively on Israel.
A headline is the first piece of information a reader will see about a news story and has a huge impact on the way the news story will be perceived. A more passive headline that talks about “rockets being launched” will create less of an impression than a more direct one along the lines of “Israeli Army shoots….”
In our survey, we found that headlines were four times more likely to reflect negatively on Israel as on the Palestinians. This is not surprising considering our finding about content being weighted against Israel. Yet just because an article describes a subject that is critical of Israel, it does not mean that the headline needs to be so weighted. Often a story that does cover both sides of an issue can bear a completely one-sided headline. Look at these examples. If all you saw was the headlines, what impressions would you have of the conflict?
Examples:
“Arab citizens in Israel bemoan lack of policing” – The article points out that initially the Arab residents were against an additional Israeli police presence. But the reader would not know this from the headline.
“Gaza militants killed in Israeli airstrike” – The headline does not mention that those killed were preparing to launch rockets at Israel.
“Jewish extremists accused of vandalizing Jerusalem monastery” – The headline does not convey that this relatively minor, though serious act of vandalism was condemned by Israeli officials.
“Palestinian family loses its Jerusalem home to Israeli settlers” – The headlines lacks any indication that this issue has been fought in the courts for years and that the courts decided that the family was not the legal owner of the property in question.
Summary
The examples of bias in the above articles, images and headlines are admittedly subtle. Taken individually, one could argue that they do not represent classic examples of anti-Israel bias. But that is what makes their impact worse. By painting a picture of the conflict in which Israel is depicted negatively and the Palestinians are ignored, the LA Times inevitably shapes public perception of Israel and the conflict.
Please share this report with the LA Times by filling out the feedback form here.
Image: CC BY-SA HonestReporting.com, flickr/andymangold
Los Angeles Times In-Depth Analysis | Blogs about Israel aggregation
12:13 pm
Dec 24, 2012
[...] article can be viewed at Los Angeles Times In-Depth Analysis on [...]
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
7 
1
Stephen Frank
6:54 pm
Dec 24, 2012
Im afraid I must agree with your assessment. I’ve too often read articles in the paper I get delivered every morning that only depict the poor occupied Palestinians being unfairly treated by those pesky Israelies.
Even in stating the two sides: it is always shaded by the inaccurate comparison of people vs. a religion. Arabs vs. Jews. Turks vs. Jews. Why is it not Muslims vs. Jews, or Arabs vs. Israelies. It’s the new and improved anti-semitism. It helps define the problem, no? It’s the Jews, stupid. Don’t you know
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
22 
1
Marilyn Himmel
11:10 pm
Dec 24, 2012
I’m so disappointed to learn of the subtle anti-Israel bias of your newspaper. Honest journalism is responsible for fairness in representing each side of a political situation and not editorializing by what they choose to include as “news” and what they do not include. Your misleading and unbalanced coverage of the Israeli-Palestinian situation needs to be changed in fairness to Israel and to your readers who are entitled to TRUTH.
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
5 
1
Leah Silver
1:43 am
Dec 25, 2012
I was shocked to learn about L.A. Times biased reporting because I had read a reprint of one of their op eds that was published in the New Jersey Jewish News that I think should be more widely circulated. After giving examples of Israel’s help, the article concludes “we believe that Israel’s substantial contributions to U.S. interests are an underappreciated aspect of this relationship and deserve equal billing to shared values and historical responsibility as rationales for American support of Israel.” It was written by Robert D. Blackwill from the George W. Bush administration and Walter B. Slocombe,undersecretery of defense in the Clinton administration.
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
5 
1
Los Angeles Times In-Depth Analysis of Anti-Israel Bias | The Conservative Papers
3:29 pm
Dec 26, 2012
[...] December 24, 2012 12:02 by Yarden Frankl [...]
Agree or Disagree:
1 
0
harry jacobi
10:18 pm
Dec 26, 2012
There is a constant an ingrained bias in the press media against Israel and its policies.
It is more pronouced and factual when seen in six month studies
.
Political correctness is upside down. People are affraid to express themselves IN FEAR to be called racists. This applies to students reluctant to speak up against their professors in colleges, or in the work place as well as at political meetings, etc.
Also, the government’s radical $15.5 trillion fiscal debt policies are detrimental to the economy of this country. Our grand childre have the burden for the rest of their lives.
Agree or Disagree:
2 
1
Abraham Paz
3:28 pm
Dec 29, 2012
I was a subscriber of LA Times during 20 years and I stopped that subscription when I noticed how biased was that paper against Israel
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
5 
1
Irv Dain
1:16 am
Dec 31, 2012
Unfortunate, but I think the bias will continue. There are more Muslims than Jews in the world
Agree or Disagree:
2 
1
martin
10:21 pm
Jan 19, 2013
Good for you Abraham, your’s is the only way. I have seen the blog Boycott the LA Times. It has been anti Israel for many years and many Jews actively boycott the rag
Agree or Disagree:
0 
0