Once again, the New York Times bends over backwards to try and show journalistic “balance” where none exists.
An article discusses a Palestinian television station that has been accused of “incitement.”
The Times gives a few examples which support this charge:
An Israeli official who spoke on the condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to do otherwise, said he recently tuned in to the channel and saw a studio guest praise a woman who tried to stab an Israeli security guard in East Jerusalem, then flash a Quranic verse encouraging Muslims to fight….
One day recently, presenters tried to keep the drumbeat of war fresh as they broadcast from the new set, which shows a masked Palestinian holding a knife dripping blood over a Star of David. Beneath was a hashtag in Arabic that translates to #theintifadaofjerusalem.
If we are saying that “incitement” refers to words and actions that motivate others to attempt murder against innocents, then these two examples, broadcast on a network whose website receives 120,000 visitors daily, offer proof. The Times could have gone on to discuss just how prevalent this type of incitement is on Palestinian social media and even directly from the Palestinian leadership.
But they didn’t.
Instead, after showing how the Palestinians are indeed guilty of incitement, the Times writes:
Incitement, of course, is not a one-way street.
The Times then tries a weak attempt to show that both sides are equally guilty of inciting people to murder. Here is their example from the Israeli side:
Israeli news organizations reported last week that the hawkish website Arutz 7 had added a game to its children’s section called “Beat the Terrorist,” in which users are given nunchucks, umbrellas and selfie sticks to beat back attackers dressed in Hamas green and carrying knives, rifles or firebombs. Arutz 7 removed the game — in which players get three lives, represented as Stars of David, and earn 10 points for each kill — but it remains available elsewhere online.
So, the Times equates a news show in which a woman who stabbed an innocent Israeli is heaped with praise with a children’s game in which the object is to “beat back” armed terrorists.
What kind of incitement is this? The Times is suggesting that Israeli children who play the game might end up wanting to kill armed terrorists. Is this so extreme? The game does NOT depict violence of any sort against innocent Palestinians.
Is a crude game, only currently available on obscure websites, really comparable to popular news shows in which glory is heaped on those who commit murder?
Of course not. But the Times is obsessed with a narrative that shows the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is simply a cycle of violence with both sides equally guilty of continuing the conflict.
If the video game was the most extreme case of “incitement” the Times could find on the Israeli side, they have just proved that there is no balance whatsoever.
[sc:graybox ]Let the New York Times Public Editor know. Write to her at [email protected]
Featured image: CC BY-NC-SA Ardail Smith via flickr with additions CC BY-NC-SA Lauren Michell Rabaino and HonestReporting
