A few members of Britain’s National Union of Journalists are already speaking out against the organization’s decision to boycott Israeli products.
Toby Harnden writes:
It takes some skill to do something that is at once inane, ineffectual, counter-productive and insulting to the intelligence. But that is what the National Union of Journalists has managed to do….
Craig McGinty wonders:
I AM a member of the NUJ and am wondering how boycotting any nation’s goods, whether it’s Israel, China or Umpah Lumpah Land will help improve the lot of both staff and freelance journalists.
UPDATE April 18: See also the NUJ’s conference blog, where Olivia Lang writes:
One thing’s for sure: it is not going to make life any easier for journalists anywhere in the world. In the current international climate, where journalists’ lives are often at threat despite their own views or neutrality, it is absolutely fundamental that the union does nothing to worsen the situation. We need to strive to maintain our objectivity when reporting and although we have a personal right to express our own views, this does not extend to the union doing the same. We are working together to protect journalists – not to endanger them.
There is another problem with this specific case. As one member mentioned, the union will ineluctably be seen by some as anti-Semitic because of this particular stance against Israel which, despite being a ridiculous misconception, is also one that needs to be taken into account. Not least because such individuals can quite rightly ask, ‘why target Israel? Why not persecute other states with bad records internationally?’ And the union has no answer.
