Spin Doctors

Today, sadly, I was not proud to be an American. Strong words, yes, but unfortunately applicable ones. The United States is a great country, as are its citizens, but I was appalled, and even ashamed at the recent conduct of our media and our politicians in regards to their attitude and coverage of the current situation in Gaza. Both were characterized by slant, bias, intolerance, oversimplification, unwillingness to compromise, and ignorance of history. Among the deplorably few bright spots are Foreign Policy magazine, and that bastion of commentary laced with dark humor The Daily Show.

John Stewart's opening monologue was so cutting that I felt guilty laughing. While it was refreshing to hear an American voice contradicting the monstrous tide of "Israeli national security" support, it's sad that it takes a fringe media outlet to do so. Stewart lampoons the one-sided commentary and political rhetoric broadcast endlessly on American news outlets.

Samuel Huntington's brainchild Foreign Policy Magazine features several blogs full of good analysis and thoughtful commentary. Daniel Levy's "Five Comments on the Gaza crisis and what to do", available on his blog Prospects for Peace also represents an actual moderate view of the conflict.

Aside from the refusal of Israel to allow foreign reporters into Gaza (though sites of Israeli civilian casualties are easily accessible) what has really struck me is the disparity in news coverage of the conflict, exemplified best by the morning news headlines from Al-Jazeera English, The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Guardian, and Haaretz.

Al-Jazeera English pulled no punches this morning, featuring a picture of a small girl held by an adult man, looking disoriented with blood covering half of her face, with the headline: "Israel Kills Dozens at Gaza School". In the article, the spokesperson for the Israeli prime minister is quoted as saying the explosions at the school were "out of proportion to the ordnance" that was used, and accused Hamas of "booby-trapping" locations in Gaza and Israel.

The New York Times homepage had no mention of the bombing of the UN school or an update on the current offensive. The only reference to Israel at all on the portal was an analysis of the lessons learned (or not learned) by Israeli leadership. To be fair, the main page of its World section was a photo of the conflict, with the headline "Israel Ponders Truce Plans as Conflict Enters Its 12th Day". The dozens of dead from the school bombings of the previous day are mentioned only in the lede.

The Washington Post fares little better. The headline "Israel hits school in Gaza camp" can be found after scrolling past two large photographs of t-shirts (the same photograph twice no less) at the MacWorld opening.

Its picture is not even of the aftermath at the school in Gaza, or even of Palestinians, but rather Israeli soldiers patrolling a border crossing, from a distance.


The UK also put American media outlets to shame. Aside from a chilling picture of a wounded policeman (a link to Avi Shlaim's biting editorial on the conduct of the Israeli government), its main article features a very strong headline as well: "Gaza's carnage - 40 dead as Israeli's bomb UN schools".

And lastly, what did Israel's major media outlet have to say about the deaths of at least 40 people, nearly all of them civilians, after its military fired upon a school in a refugee camp where people have fled in order to escape the possibility of death in their homes?

Practically nothing.

The most relevant headline was "IDF: Hamas militants fired shells from inside UN school in Gaza".

The truth is no doubt in the middle of the quagmire. And each of these organizations serves a particular audience, which no doubt influences the tone and extent of its coverage. However, historically, news media have been the gatekeepers of information, even if sometimes that meant they took a top down approach, speaking from on high and dictating "the news of the day". Those were considered to be the objectively important stories, that people should know about, even if they occurred far away.

I have heard people here criticize Americans as not caring about the plight of the Palestinian people, but I disagree. While we have lost patience with foreign affairs as a result of a string of domestic crisis (most notably Katrina), I would say that the bigger problem is a lack of awareness. How can we expect to hold the American people accountable for information which they must jump through hoops to find? And why is that struggle for access necessary? If nearly every major news outlet in the world finds a story important enough to put on it's front page, why do our news outlets and politicians seem like broken records, repeating lines nearly the complete opposite of what everyone else is saying?

Defending the ignorance of America gets old quickly, especially in the face of seemingly blind support by the Bush administration of all Israeli actions. Indeed, it has been said by more than one analyst (in the US and abroad) that the Israeli government chose to launch its offensive now because they knew they would not face censure from their stalwart ally in the West.

We need a press and a polity who are both strong enough in their character and passionate about real solutions to stand up and hold everyone accountable. And that includes Israel, the United States, and Hamas, and will require concessions on all sides, and perhaps coming to terms with some ugly truths. Otherwise papers around the world will continue to feature photos of dead and disfigured children on their front pages. Everywhere, that is, except Tel Aviv, New York, and Washington, D.C.


All photos used in this post were taken from the news outlet referenced near them in the text. Thanks and credit goes to those organizations.