so, the BBC, CNN, Reuters, are all biased against Israel.
So, who can I read, december?
Because it’s what the OP was getting at.
There are organized groups that complain about media bias, like Honest Reporting and CAMERA. I suspect that many of the letters to the editor that Ingrams complains about come at the behest of this type of group. I suspect that many of those writing letters are Jewish.
A question I’m trying to get at is whether these partisan groups encourage dishonest debate. If so, Ingrams might be right to ignore letters from Jews, even though it isn’t PC to admit it.
Ingrams does have a point as to revealing key facts about oneself when writing an opinion piece.
For instance, if his columns were accompanied by the statement “Richard Ingrams is an unmitigated ass”, then people could avoid wasting time reading his drivel.
On the subject of Stealth Jews Who Haven’t Declared Themselves, Ingrams is letting himself in for big trouble when it comes to reading letters to the editor. He is apparently blissfully unaware that many Jews have non-Jewish-sounding names. So it is entirely possible that he has read, and even been influenced by well-thought out letters on various sides of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict without realizing the source! :eek:
Hey, I agree with Ingrams. It seems like a good I idea, what he’s doing.
I also think juries shouldn’t be allowed to listen to lawyers. After all, they’re hardly objective.
Hey, I agree with Ingrams. It seems like a good idea, what he’s doing.
I also think juries shouldn’t be allowed to listen to lawyers. After all, they’re hardly objective.
You could try the Jerusalem Post or Haaretz. They’ll give you the other side’s POV. Then you can compare the arguments and evidence and make up your own mind. The Wall Street Journal’s OpinionJournal.com is another source that tends to be pro-Israel.
I wouldn’t bother with the Jerusalem Post, it’s a bit like the Israeli Daily Mail, but Ha’aretz is what I call an ‘honest newspaper’ in that while not being unbiased does attempt to report on the conflict and avoid propaganda (infact I’m rather suprised to see December recommend it as I would imagine it’s slightly left -of-centre stance would be at odds with his politics).
It’s bigotry just to dismiss the letters because of Jewish names, in my experince the harshist critics of Israel are in fact Jewish themselves, for example, In Britian, the Chief Rabbi Jonathan Sachs, Jewish MPs Oona King and Gerald Kauffman and leading social scientist Steve Rose, who is Jewish, have all vocally criticized Israel to varying degrees.
As I said earlier, I think that the test of Ingrams’ bigotry is in whether or not he applies his “no partisan” rule to other cases than Jews on Israel. If he does, it’s probably rather idiotic(allowing only people not interested in a topic to comment on it is NOT exactly the best way to inspire paper-selling debates), but fair. If he does not, he’s a bigot. Given what I know of the Guardian, I have my opinion (which, lacking proof, I will keep to myself) on the matter.
As to the choice of newspapers, I don’t think it is justified comparing the JP to (I Think?) a rather yellow tabloid (correct me if I got you all wrong). They definitely don’t do page 3 nudies, for example… They are, however, slightly to the right of Attila the Hun.
Oh, and I also have to disagree with your description of Ha’Aretz as slightly left of center 
No, the Daily Mail don’t have page three, that’s the Sun. The Daily Mail is Britain’s most right-wing national daily. I don’t read Ha’Aretz that often, so I can’t argue with your assememnt (that is assuming that you read it more than me), but it does publish pieces by right-wing commentators too, I’d say it’s like Israel’s version of the Guardian though probably not as left-wing.
I do read the Guardian, but I never read the columns or any of the opinion pieces so I only have a vague inkling on who Richard Ingrams is and what he writes.
Sorry for the error. I guess we agree now…
Well, for starters let’s define “center” (sorry, I learned my English on the wrong side of the pond). I suspect that what I, as an Israeli, consider “center”, you would call at least moderately right-wing and vice-versa. So I would be comparing Ha’Aretz to a very different POV which I regard as “center” than you would be comparing it to.
And I’m not an avid Guardian reader, but somehow saying something isn’t “as left wing as the Guardian” appears to me to leave about 99% of the political spectrum open to it
To be fair to Ingram, though Jewish people as a whole have the full spectrum of opinion, the letters that media outlets get tend to skew towards the Jewish Defense League. (at least what family in the biz told me, besides zealots generally have better letter writing campaigns)
That said, reading the first paragraph or sentence would be a much less dumb-ass way of deciding whether it’s worth reading the whole letter.
PS- Barbara Amiel and Lord Tubby Black are neo-con thugs.
Ingrams is the former editor of private eye and is not a journalist or a commentator, just an grumpy old iconoclast, sometimes funny, sometimes not.
He’s not a serious commentator in any way, just a self proclaimed old guy who doesn’t give a shit what anyone thinks anymore. His writings appear all over the place, not just the Guardian. I believe he has a magazine called The Oldie or something like that.
He can be somewhat ascerbic about Bush , blair and the Iraq war.
Ha’aretz is about as far to the left as the Post is to the right; at least, that’s the consensus in Israel. Not that many people read the Post, of course, or that many more read Ha’aretz.
If you want a more centriast paper, as well as one that is actually read by the Israeli public, try Maariv. The English website has been pared down quite a bit from the original edition, but it will give you a gist.
The Guardian, are undeniably left wing but they’re not THAT left wing (I’d say liberal-intellectual sums their political postion best) and they’re well right of newspapers like the Socilaist Worker (the newspaper of the SWP).
Yes, I tried to adjust for Israeli politics but the only Israel I know for sure is in the centre is Eyal Berkovic!!
I posted the “pro-semite” pit thread some time ago. It seems that some people think Jews are incapable of thinking outside their religious identity. That’s a dangerous trend.
X~Slayer(ALE) is correct. Everyone has a bias. Somehow it’s become acceptable in some quarters to see “Ariel Cohen” or whatever and reject the opinion out of hand. Spinning that as anything but anti-Semitism is tough for me.
The guardian is not left wing, it’s slightly left of centre liberal in British politics editorially and traditionally adopts a critical approach to any govt regardless of colour and will lambast blair with as much gusto as it attacked Thatcher if it thinks something is wrong.
It hosts columnists and freelancers from across the mainstream political spectrum, with shadow tory ministers regularly giving their own take on things.
In terms of balance it’s partisanship is as nothing compared to the rabid right wing press like anything owned by Murdoch or Black. It is run by a board of trustees rather than a single owner.
*Israeli, not Israel
“As I said earlier, I think that the test of Ingrams’ bigotry is in whether or not he applies his “no partisan” rule to other cases than Jews on Israel”
He does mention homosexual clerics in the article so he is not just talking about Israel and Jews. I agree that his argument is pretty stupid in any case.
Nah, Eyal B is a Rightie. And “Rocket” Ronnie (Rosenthal) is/was a leftie! Can’t think of a “centrist” player (along these guideline) off the top of my head - Israeli or otherwise
Football is a lot more fun than politics. Too bad it can’t be used to settle political disputes…
Yes, I read the article, too. I find it interesting that he singled out Homosexuals and Jews…, and also that he neglected to mention whether or not he would object to Anti-homosexuals commenting on matters relating to Homosexuals, or whether he would single out Arabs and avoid reading their comments on things Jewish/Israeli.
I have to say that, having read the article, I tend to find him guilty on both counts (that is, homophobia and anti-semitism/zionism)