[sc:graybox ]This guest post is by Jesse Lewis, an intern at HonestReporting’s headquarters in Jerusalem.
In recent months, ISIS has caught the attention of news outlets, politicians, and the general public as the terror organization beheads and kills innocents on its quest for the establishment of an Islamic Caliphate. As a result of ISIS’s recorded beheadings of American and British journalists and advancing control of Iraq and Syria, the U.S. has launched a campaign of airstrikes to eliminate the threat.
Not only are the media afraid to refer to this group as terrorists, but the U.S. airstrikes also have stark similarities to Israel’s Operation Protective Edge this summer. An examination of these graphically illustrates the double standard applied to Israel that we unfortunately see far too often.
Despite Obama’s declaration of ISIS as a terrorist group, the major news outlets, such as the New York Times, the LA Times, and the Washington Post, have not followed suit.
The New York Times sticks to the “militant” label, and refrains from using more powerful terminology. The Los Angeles Times refers to ISIS as “brutal Islamic State militants,” and the insertion of “brutal” is essential to the understanding of their tactics and the separation of this group from legitimate militaries.
At least “militant” has a somewhat negative connotation to it, but on September 16th, the Associated Press wrote that an airstrike “hit an armed truck and fighters.” The term “fighter” is not only neutral, but can sometimes have a positive insinuation. Aren’t U.S. ground troops, who are working to eliminate the Islamic threat, fighters too? This terminology humanizes ISIS, and implies that group has a tangible and rational cause. It compares ISIS actions to the military personnel of civilized and forward thinking countries around the world.
However, throughout the countless articles written about ISIS on these major news sites, not one specifically describes the group as “terrorists” in their reports. “Militants” and “extremists” are the most common terms, and while they do have negative connotations, the media are too hesitant, or perhaps too afraid, to call this group what they really are: terrorists. Regarding Israel, they carelessly use the same incendiary terms they use to describe ISIS. New York Times op-ed author Ali Jarbawi said the following in a piece about Israel’s supposed “brutal occupation”:
There is now an extremist, racist ideological current in Israel that not only justifies the recent onslaught on the Gaza Strip, but actually encourages the use of enormous and disproportionate violence against civilians, which has led to the extermination of entire families.
Yes, he calls Israel “racist” and “extremist”, the same terms used to describe ISIS and its barbaric actions. He uses identical words to describe a civilized, progressive country that defends its citizens against unjustified acts of terror, to a radical cult that senselessly beheads non-believers, murders women and children, and perpetrates some of the biggest human rights violations on the planet.
The double standard against Israel is also seen in the Washington Post’s September 23rd article about 5 Islamic countries joining the air campaign against ISIS. The article states:
U.S. military leaders said Tuesday their aerial bombardment of Syria was only the beginning of a prolonged campaign that will continue intermittently for months and will become more difficult as targeted militants seek refuge in populated areas.
It is interesting to note that this is the only mention of the airstrikes occurring over populated areas.
Over the summer, there was article upon article written daily by practically every news outlet concerning Israel bombing Gazan population centers. There were cries about how evil this was, and enormous criticism over the loss of innocent lives in Gaza.
Yet, regarding the U.S. offensive against ISIS, there is no comparable outcry. While it is important to note that there are very few western reporters in the areas being targeted by the U.S, there is still room for more reporting and media attention. This lack of attention mirrors the fact that there is virtually no public outcry—no protests, calls for the end of the American state, or accusations of brutality and racial cleansing—all things Israel faces everyday. Unlike in Israel’s situation, there are no missiles being launched on American homes, nor are there tunnels leading to neighborhoods in the U.S. which ISIS built to infiltrate and kill civilians. Rather, two Americans were beheaded on foreign soil, and while this is a horrific offense and perhaps a reason to respond, there is no comparison between the potential threat to American lives and the daily tangible threat to Israeli lives.
The International Business Times reports that on October 18th, a single U.S. airstrike left 24 dead. Where are their names and pictures plastered all over the international press? This demonstrates a double standard where Israel is held to impossibly high standards where others, in this case the U.S., are not.
I’m not suggesting the U.S. should abandon its campaign against ISIS, but I think that if the media were to show some real consistency then the collateral damage caused by these strikes should get as much—if not more—attention as Israel’s unavoidable attacks this summer did.
