UPDATE
As this post was published, another Palestinian terror attack happened not far from Sunday’s attack outside Ofra. At this time, two Israelis are dead and two severely wounded. While in the piece below, we criticize the media for not covering the Ofra attack, some media outlets such as the New York Times and Washington Post have now published reports covering the general upsurge in Palestinian terrorism.
There was a distinct lack of coverage of a Palestinian terrorist attack at a bus stop outside the Jewish settlement of Ofra on Sunday. The international media virtually ignored the drive-by shooting that wounded seven Israelis including a seven month pregnant woman who was seriously injured.
Her baby was delivered in an emergency operation as a result of the shooting. This alone led us to believe that this story of Palestinian terror would be newsworthy.
We were wrong.
Join the fight for Israel’s fair coverage in the news
The adage “if it bleeds it leads” is often cited when it comes to how media decide what to report on. In addition, foreign journalists working in Israel have told us that a death trumps everything. Israel, thankfully, by and large succeeds in preventing mass casualties on its own side. But this works against Israel when it comes to the media coverage. If Israelis are ‘only’ injured then this is not deemed newsworthy despite the murderous intent of the Palestinian terrorists.
Tragically, four days after the Ofra terrorist attack, the newborn son of Shira and Amichai Ish-Ran, named Amiad Yisrael shortly before his burial, lost his battle for life.
Given that there was now an Israeli fatality, and a baby at that, we thought that this would be newsworthy.
We were wrong.
Aside from CNN and wire services such as Reuters and Associated Press, there was virtually no coverage.
False moral equivalence
What did catch our attention, however, was The Independent, which didn’t bother to report on the original incident but now uses the death of a Palestinian toddler to create a moral “balance” to justify its story.
The sub-header claiming that the Israeli baby was “born prematurely during a Palestinian shooting” is quite grotesque given the actual events that led to his death.
As for the Palestinian four-year old, let’s be absolutely clear – the death of any baby or child is tragic irrespective of whose side of a conflict they are on. Babies do not get a choice in their parents’ decisions.
However, there is a huge moral gulf between how these two babies died.
Ahmad Abu Abed was brought by his parents to the Gaza border area where Palestinian rioters were engaging in violent protests. The Abu Abed family would have undoubtedly been aware of the risks involved. While there is some debate as to just how close they were to the border fence when shrapnel hit the baby, nonetheless the basic question remains as to why anyone would bring a baby to the scene of a riot.
In addition, the fact that it was shrapnel that hit the baby is an indicator that the Abu Abed’s were not deliberately targeted by the IDF, which is currently investigating the incident. The IDF does not deliberately target babies or children. Period.
Palestinian terrorists, however, do exactly that. Shira and Amichai Ish-Ran were waiting at a bus stop following Hanukkah celebrations. There is no justification for shooting a pregnant woman in the stomach irrespective of whether you agree or disagree with where the victims of the shooting happened to live in the disputed territories.
The bottom line is that Amiad Yisrael Ish-Ran was deliberately targeted by Palestinian terrorists who fully intended to murder Israeli Jews. Ahmad Abu Abed was the dreadful and accidental victim of a dangerous situation that he had been deliberately placed in.
For The Independent, Amiad Ish-Ran and the Ofra terror attack warranted only five out of the 17 paragraphs of its story. (See here for more on imbalanced reporting.) Because that’s what an Israeli victim of terror is to that media outlet – an afterthought to a piece relying on a false moral equivalence as a pretense to give some balance.
Better that The Independent had followed the lead of most of the media and failed to cover the death of Amiad Ish-Ran at all.
Help us get the message out. Please share this content on Facebook and Twitter by pressing on the icons at the top or bottom of this piece.
