Not sure I see a debate in here. You present a google video by the Media Foundation. I may have the wrong group, but this one actually uses the word “prankster” when describing itself.
I’m pretty sure I could also cherry pick news segments to provide any POV I wish (see Loose Change). I watch CNN, MSNBC and FOX (yeah I know) and while they all present it in different ways I dont see any more bias toward Israel than I do any other story.
Unless you count POV as bias, I dont see what argument you are presenting, or how you have provided any real facts to your position other than, again, your own POV on the issue.
Realizing now that it was pointless to try to contibute to this thread, I must say that a pro-Israeli bias does not mean that the American press unquestioningly supports Israel, which I see now is your axe to grind in opening this thread. The media, in my view, reflect the same bias as most Americans: they support Israel, want to see a negotiated peace, and question whether the Palestinian leadership are able or willing to do what is needed to achieve that goal.
If I were interested in persuing this discussion, I’d question what media coverage has done more damage to the peace process: American media with the above-described tilt, or Arab media that can contain vivid and racist incitements to violence? The answer is pretty damn clear.
elmwood, this strikes me as tantamount to an ad hominem line of attack. If you disagree with the poster’s ideas, why not dispute them factually rather than attacking the poster?
Because there’s no point in arguing with certain classes of people.
When a poster makes a very vague argument “American media is biased towards Israel” and refuses to get more specific, one can draw certain conclusions about that poster.
What conclusions do you mean? Now you’re arguing by innuendo.
I am not arguing in support of the OP’s position. I am only saying the question should be debated on its merits. All I see is mudslinging. The OP did link a video, which I haven’t watched yet. Have you? If so, why not respond to its content?
Well to begin, your cite is a an editorial piece, not a news article. The article cites other stories and headlines but doesn’t give dates or times or links for that matter. So it is hard to tell if the quotes are taking out of context or what have you.
From the editorial:
[quote]
…the heads of The Times, CNN and the rest of the “left wing” media that won’t stand up for what’s morally right. These people are too selfish or too weak to do what’s right, and its “off with the heads” of those who do.
[quote]
Lets assume for the sake of this debate he’s right. So the 40% “coverage” of Palestine death’s is due to the media being weak and morally wrong, or in thrall of the US Government. If that was the case, why did they report any Palestine deaths? They are not obligated to, after all they are a private business and can report on any damn thing they choose.
What would prove they are not bias? A complete 50-50 reporting of all deaths in exactly the same detail on the exact same pages? Which article would be first? If the Israel article is first, are they being bias again? Where does it end, and how can you judge?
Look, the internet has gives you access to so much information, why complain about what a few news outlets do? if you dont like the coverage, find a site that gives you the news the way you like it.
You have yet to actually bring a real cite or debate stance to this OP. Opinions dont cont, unverified quotes and stats, dont count (again, see Loose Change). come up with something solid, or stop coming in at all.
And btw, I am not against the idea of the us media being bias, but again there is POV and there is out right lying to prove your sides point. To me you keep pointing out the former, when you should be working on the latter.
Nothing I saw in the first bit showed that the producers had any degree of intellectual honesty, or had any right to be talking about others’ bias. Not to handwave any complaints they may have with a tu quoque, just stating that it wasn’t worth my time to wade through the mound of elephant dung to get to the peanut burried under it.
If the OP would like to cite specific claims rather than asking folks to sit through two hours of a movie whose intro is a virtual catalogue of intellectual dishonesty, that’d be good.
I’ve never heard “community” used in American media to describe Israeli settlements. That alone would make me question the validity of this documentary.
The New York Times has editorially been critical of both Hezbollah and Israel in its coverage of the conflict in Lebanon. Its large front page photo in today’s edition shows people in Beirut with a backdrop of bombing-related destruction. It has extensively covered civilian casualties in Lebanon, as have other U.S. media.
No, I think there is a healthy divergence of opinion and more sophisticated and historically aware coverage than one finds in most foreign news media.
Please explain in detail your apparent conclusion that U.S. media output regarding Israel reflects a lack of “freedom”. Innuendo does not cut it in GD.
Your entire OP rests on one assumption…that there is some neutral standard by which we can judge bias, that there is some universal position about the facts and opinion over Israel, its history, policies and actions. And further that Europe (or the BBC World) is the baseline by which everything else must be judged.
Based on that assumption I suppose once could posit that the US media, taken as a whole, IS biased toward Israel. However, I think you’ll find that your baseline assumption that Europe and or the BBC is hardly a neutral baseline with which to judge the whole of US media. One could just as easily (and just as erroneously) ask ‘Is European media, represented by BBC World, to biased toward Israel?’…to similar effect.
Obviously this thought hasn’t occured to you however as I’m pretty sure you’ve actually used this same cite AND arguement in the past. My question to you (and others of similar thinking) would be…why is there an automatic assumption that the US media, taken as a whole is overly biased, but that European media, taken as a whole, is not? Where does this perception come from? What are the facts backing such an assertion up? How would one even judge? Based on what yardstick?
Funny, I’d’ve thought the “liberal” bias was to favour the romantic downtrodden Arabs rather than the efficient militarized Israelis. Wasn’t that the stereotype, at least among university newspapers and such?
This media bias threads always amuse me becuase there is an obvious bias in the media. That one being of course towards money. Do you think the guys that run Fox News decided to be a conservative news outlet becuase of political leanings? Of course not, they saw a niche in the marketplace and thought they could make money by filling it.
It’s the same at every media outlet. You report the news in the way that will make you the most money.
I’m starting to think Wildfire has me on ignore. Could it be because I’m Jewish? Hmmmm …
I’m not attacking. I’m just asking a question: is Wildfire capable of any discussion that does not involve the evils of Israel and the US? That’s about all he/she has posted about here.
In my view the biggest PR problem the Palestinians and their supporters have is that they think it is hunky dory to strap on a bomb filled with ball bearings and set it off in a bus full of women and children. Once they stop doing shit like that then maybe they can worry about subtle biases in news reporting.
If the Palestinians would adopt the tactics of Gahndi, Mandela, or King then they would have the overwhelming support of the American people. It’s not like mainstream America likes Jews (our president thinks they are going to hell unless they accept Jesus Christ) its just that the Palestinians are so incredibly unsympathetic. Look back to the time when most Americans heard the term Palestinian: the PLO kidnapped and killed the Israeli Olympic atheletes. What a stupid thing to do from a PR standpoint. Why not just run over a bunch of puppies with a steam roller for god’s sake.
Until they straighten up, just shut the fuck up.
And for the record, I think that Zionism is stupid and that a bunch of Europeans don’t have the right to displace people who grew up in the middle east. But given the way the Palestinians act I’m rooting for Israel for now.