Amnesty International released its report on the Gaza war and I'm scratching my head at a fascinating disparity of coverage. The Irish Times writes of Amnesty:
The organisation contrasts the Israeli attitude with that of Hamas, which rules Gaza and freely permits human rights organisations to conduct investigations into Israeli and Palestinian abuses.
But according to Financial Times:
While Hamas has said it would help the mission, the fact that its officials have often accompanied the investigators in Gaza has drawn scepticism about the ability of witnesses to freely describe the militant group’s actions.
Are the Times and the FT talking about the same Gaza? I don't understand how any journalist as reasonably knowledgable about Gaza as Jansen can write that with a straight face.
The Amnesty and UN investigations are further examples of the tear-jerker journalism phenomenon.
UPDATE: Is the dueling spin more of a reflection on Amnesty's lead researcher, Donatella Rovera, than on the MSM? AP writes:
She said investigators were able to operate freely in Gaza, without any intervention by Hamas security forces . . . .
The U.N. is examining the conduct of both sides to the conflict. Hamas allowed veteran war crimes investigator Richard Goldstone and his team into Gaza last month, but Hamas security often accompanied them, raising questions about the ability of witnesses to freely describe the militant group's actions.
