Alison Weir, author and journalist, and founder of the site, If Americans Knew, has been ranting about censorship and bias in the American press on matters concerning Israel for years. To say the least, this censorship, bias, and even pro-Israel spin has helped Israel cover up its occupation and colonialism of Palestine as well as the slow ethnic cleansing of its people. Other sources (no links) have unabashedly called the New York Times (and the Washington Post) part of “the Zionist press” in America.
The Electronic Intifada (EI) just broke this important story about the New York Times, and Alison Weir has written the following commentary on it, posted on her blog.
(snip)
This is obviously a serious conflict of interest.
As EI points out, “The New York Times’ own ‘Company policy on Ethics in Journalism’ acknowledges that the activities of a journalist’s family member may constitute a conflict of interest. It includes as an example, “A brother or a daughter in a high-profile job on Wall Street might produce the appearance of conflict for a business reporter or editor.” Such conflicts may on occasion require the staff member “to withdraw from certain coverage.”
Many of us have long noted the Times’ Israel bias in its coverage and have been troubled by Bronner’s Israeli-centric reporting.
(snip)
Conversation with Bronner
During this period (2005) I spoke by phone with Ethan Bronner, at that time deputy foreign editor for the Times. Bronner, like Okrent, said it would be impossible to find Arab-American or Muslim-American journalists to balance out the Jewish-American journalists working at the Times on this issue.
Again, I was astonished. I said, “Ethan, how many people are we talking about? Three reporters?” He corrected me: “two.” (I believe these were the numbers, though it’s possible that I suggested four reporters and he corrected me to three; I’d have to look back through notes buried in a file somewhere to ascertain the specific figures.)
I have since occasionally written articles noting the Times’ failure to adequately cover this issue. For example, in “Anatomy of a Cover-up: When a Mother Gets Killed Does She Make a Sound,” I describe a criminal tragedy that went largely uncovered by the US media. I noted that the New York Times reported it in the last two paragraphs of a 24-paragraph story.
Similarly, in another article, “Just Another Mother Murdered,” I again found the US media ignoring a Palestinian tragedy. The New York Times had given it one sentence.
(snip)
There is a significant problem here. Bronner is part of it. It’s time for the New York Times to begin to report on Israel-Palestine fully, accurately, and without Israeli spin. In the meantime, I suggest that people turn elsewhere for news.
In the next section of Weir’s long article, she covers Other Sources for News, which takes us to more reliable sources of information about the Middle East, not covered, ignored by the Times. On her own site,”Israel-Palestine: The Missing Headlines” tries to serve as an aggregator of important stories from a number of reliable Middle East sources.
As Weir contends: “Fortunately, Americans don’t need to rely on the New York Times anymore.”
(Many useful links are also provided in the full article, which is highly recommended reading.)
A recent story from Mondoweiss:
Read on at LINK
“He made it look like we set out to go after the economic infrastructure and civilians, that it was intentional.“
No, General, YOU made it very clear that you set out to go after economic infrastructure and civilians, and that it was intentional, just as you did in Lebanon in 2006, and just as you have done in Palestine and other places going back to the earliest days of Zionism. Setting out to go after the economic infrastructure goes all the way back to Herzl (we could start with his statement in Der Judenstadt about spiriting undesirable population – i.e. the non-Jewish indigenes – “across the border by denying them employment in our land”, and go on from there). Ben Gurion, and plenty of others also advocated and took actions to force the Palestinians out of Palestine by economic means. The Zionists and Israelis have provided enough material over the last century or so for quite a thick book.
Brazen, bloody liars.
And Netanyahu is just an extension of the Herlz ethic of cleansing the undersirable Arab natives out of the Jewish state. But Herlz operated before Germany set out to do the same thing, purify the state of its undesirable population. It was called the “Jewish problem.”
Musical chairs. You would have thought people would learn from history. “Never again” was Begin’s motto, but it did happen again, the Nakba.
Steve Jobs may have just breathed new life into the NYT and a dying newspaper industry with his new iTablet. Pundits are speculating about whether making newspapers available (and readable) for the tech savvy will do for newspapers what the iPod did for the music industry.
.
It’s nothing more than vigilantism or lynch mob justice.
(FMEP) – So why the over-reaction to Mitchell’s comments? The obvious answer: right-wingers in Israel and their US supporters are taking a page out of the settlers’ playbook and implementing a “price tag” strategy of their own.
“Price Tag,” for those who don’t know, is the settler strategy of imposing a high cost for any actions – even insignificant ones – against outposts. This means that when Israeli forces come to tear down an illegal settler shack erected on Palestinian land, the settlers try to block them, rampaging through the area, attacking Palestinians and their property (including recently a mosque), and harassing and increasingly attacking Israeli security personnel. The logic is that if the settlers can make Israel suffer enough for taking even insignificant actions against outposts, they can deter any significant action against outposts ever being taken – making Israeli authorities believe that the costs of such action would be prohibitive.
[Rabbi Shapira published a controversial book last year which includes discussion of interpretations of the circumstances under which Jewish law permits Jews to kill non-Jews.]
Israeli government plans land giveaway to combat troops
"But I will not let myself be reduced to silence."While this business about Bronner’s son is slightly interesting, I do not find it significant. Bronner’s work speaks for itself, always has, and always will. He is a hack and a shill for Israel, always has been, and always will be. It makes not one iota of difference whether his son is in the IOF any more than it would make a difference if he were the most radical anti-Zionist activist known to man. Ethan Bronner is what he is independently of his son’s status, and he proves it with every piece he writes.
Anyone who wants to really see for themsoeves should do a content analysis of the NY Times reporting of the Israel-Palestine issue sometime. The results are revealing. One sided propaganda is a good description.
The NY Times is not a reliable source on this issue. Then again it isnt very reliable on anything else.
However, take a look for yourselves.