Politics & Policy

The Media’s Shameful, Shameless Bias against Israel

Palestinians clash with Israeli soldiers in Hebron, September 29, 2015. (Hazem Bader/AFP/Getty)

On Sunday, October 11, the Los Angeles Times ran the headline “6 Palestinian Teens Die Amid Mideast Unrest.” It was, technically, true. But it left out a few key details.

Try the opening sentence, instead: “Two Palestinian teenagers were shot to death Saturday in Jerusalem, officials said, after they carried out separate stabbing attacks on an ultra-Orthodox Jew and two Israeli police officers.” Among Palestinians, stabbing Israelis is in vogue at present — as are shooting them, ramming them with vehicles, and bludgeoning them with meat cleavers, all of which have also taken place in the “unrest” of the past few weeks. Seven Israelis have been killed and dozens wounded in attacks since Rosh Hashanah, the Jewish New Year celebration, ended on September 15. The purported reason for the renewed violence is the rumor, despite Benjamin Netanyahu’s assurances to the contrary, that the Israeli government plans to reopen the Temple Mount to Jews. But the rash of violence is better explained by a century-long virus of hatred.

Western media outlets, as this latest flare-up reminds us, suffer their own mild case of this virus, manifested in their headlines. NBC News recently published a story entitled, “Dispute Over Viral Video of Shot Ahmed Manasrah Sums Up Israel-Palestinian Conflict.” What it summarizes is nothing; what it omits — that the wounded 13-year-old Palestinian and his 15-year-old cousin were shot after stabbing and seriously wounding two Israelis — is quite a bit. At the New York Times, there was, “Israeli Police Officers Kill Two Palestinian Men.” (Guess why). On its website, CNN blared, “Palestinian Youth: ‘Now We’ll Fight,’” with the subtitle, “Israeli-Palestinian Tensions Escalate with Four Violent Attacks.”  Yahoo News got in on the action with, “Israeli Police Shoot Dead Palestinian at Entrance to Jerusalem’s Walled Old City,” which is both biased and grammatically ambiguous. And while no one expects Al Jazeera to be fair and balanced on this subject, its Twitter tease for a (less egregious) article on a stabbing that killed two Israelis in early October was nothing short of extraordinary: “Palestinian Shot Dead after Fatal Stabbing in Jerusalem; 2 Israeli Victims Also Killed.”

RELATED: Palestinian Reasoning: Yield to Our Crazy Religious Intolerance or We’ll Kill You

Overseas, coverage has been, if possible, worse. Earlier this month, the BBC titled an article “Palestinian Shot Dead after Jerusalem Attack Kills Two.” (The tweet advertising the article simply read, “Attacker kills two in Jerusalem.”) When that headline garnered the wrong kind of social-media attention, the BBC modified it — “Jerusalem Attack: Israelis Killed in Old City ‘By Palestinian’” — making use of what can only be called unorthodox punctuation. Soon, they stripped the quotation marks, then later changed the headline again: “Jerusalem: Palestinian kills two Israelis in Old City.” Meanwhile, the Independent wailed, “Israel Kills Pregnant Mother and Her Baby in Revenge Attacks,” a curious way of describing “airstrikes in Gaza targeting Hamas weapons manufacturing facilities,” as the article eventually acknowledges.

#share#Conscious manipulation is on display here — someone at Al Jazeera worked hard to come up with that misleading tweet — but one senses, more than intent, the inevitable results of an implacable mindset. The New York Times and the BBC and the rest see what the Palestinians are doing; but they long ago committed themselves to making Israel’s legitimacy a matter of debate. They believe that the Jews have oppressed and occupied and reduced the Palestinians to poverty and despair. In such circumstances, they think, who wouldn’t lash out?

RELATED: There Is No God But Hephaestus

For nearly 70 years the Left has trafficked in false moral equivalences between terrorists and those in Israel defending themselves from terrorism. A responsible media would expose that unconvincing narrative. The one we’ve got has decided to participate in its propagation instead.

If you need more evidence, just tune in. The intifada will surely be televised.

— Ian Tuttle is a William F. Buckley Jr. Fellow in Political Journalism at the National Review Institute.

Ian Tuttle — Ian Tuttle is the former Thomas L. Rhodes Journalism Fellow at the National Review Institute.

Most Popular

White House

What Is Hillary Clinton Thinking?

When Homer Simpson looks in the mirror, he sees ripped chest muscles and arms like the trunks of beech trees. When Hillary Clinton looks in the mirror, she sees America’s sweetheart. She thinks: America adores me. She thinks: America already chose me to be president once! She thinks: Everyone is comparing me ... Read More
Law & the Courts

Grassley’s Kangaroo Court

So now it looks like next Thursday. On Judge Brett Kavanaugh’s manifestly meritorious nomination to the Supreme Court, what was supposed to be the vote out of the Senate Judiciary Committee this past Thursday now appears to be sliding into a hearing to be held next Thursday. Or, who knows, maybe a Thursday ... Read More
Law & the Courts

Censure Dianne Feinstein

Regardless of the fate of Brett Kavanaugh’s nomination, the Senate should censure the ranking Democratic member of the Judiciary Committee, Dianne Feinstein. Her deception and maneuvering, condemned across the political spectrum, seriously interfered with the Senate’s performance of its constitutional duty to ... Read More
U.S.

Are We on the Verge of Civil War?

Americans keep dividing into two hostile camps. It seems the country is back to 1860 on the eve of the Civil War, rather than in 2018, during the greatest age of affluence, leisure, and freedom in the history of civilization. The ancient historian Thucydides called the civil discord that tore apart the ... Read More