Anti-Israel berichtgeving door Associated Press

Deze voorbeelden kom ik ook in bijvoorbeeld NRC Handelsblad en bij het NOS journaal geregeld tegen. Het Arabische Vredesplan wordt neergezet als een fair plan dat Israel erkenning en vrede biedt in ruil voor terugtrekking uit de bezette gebieden. Arabieren komen langer aan het woord en meer over de zaak zelf, terwijl Israelische woordvoerders, als ze al aan het woord komen, vaker algemene statements geven. Van Palestijns leed laat men bovendien altijd meer beelden zien en Palestijnse bronnen worden als betrouwbaarder neergezet, Israelische afstandelijker als ze niet geheel genegeerd worden. Heel Oost-Jeruzalem wordt 'bezet Arabisch Jeruzalem' genoemd, waarmee de sterke Joodse band met dit deel van de stad wordt ontkend. Dit werd echter door Jordanië illegaal veroverd in 1948, waarbij de daar wonende Joden werden verdreven. Hamas wordt soms zelfs een 'verzetsbeweging' genoemd, vaak ook 'islamitische beweging' en nooit 'terroristisch'. En inderdaad, Lieberman wordt rechts-extremistisch (extreemrechts) genoemd, of ultranationalistisch, Netanjahoe is een hardliner of een havik, en Abbas is gematigd en een man van vrede en dialoog. Het enige probleem in het Israelisch-Palestijns conflict zijn de nederzettingen en de extreem nationalistische kolonisten, gesteund door het nieuwe rechtse kabinet. Het is vreemd dat niet meer mensen over deze ontoelaatbaar tendensieuze berichtgeving vallen. Het effect blijft ondertussen niet uit: steeds meer mensen zien Israel als de oorzaak van alle problemen in het Midden-Oosten, en de Palestijnen als machteloze en onschuldige slachtoffers.

 

RP

-------------

 

AP anti-Israel bias

http://zionism-israel.com/israel_news/2009/09/ap-anti-israel-bias.html

 

It is about time someone noticed the bias in AP and Reuters despatches. Some other tricks. AP routinely writes that the Arab Peace Initiative would give Israel peace in return for withdrawal to 1967 borders. Sounds like a good deal, right? End the occupation, get peace. AP neglects some details. The Arab peace initiative calls for Israel to withdraw completely from East Jerusalem, including the Jewish parts, and it seems to require Israel to accept the return of Palestinian Arab refugees, which would end Jewish self determination in the only Jewish country in the world. So the deal look more like "Give up your capital and your country, and we'll give you 'peace.'" What sort of peace is that? But it is worse than that, since Arab League spokespeople routinely protest that the Arab peace initiative is a recommendation, and that no Arab country would be bound to recognize Israel. So the deal is, "Give up your capital and your country, and maybe some of us will give you 'peace'." Another trick is the unprofessional use of adjectives. News agency dispatches routinely characterize Mahmoud Abbas, King Abdullah of Jordan and King Abdulla of Saudi Arabia, as well as Hosni Mubarak of Egypt and other Arab leaders as "moderate" but refer to Avigdor Lieberman as the "ultranationalist" Foreign Minister of the "Right leaning" government of Benjamin Netanyahu. Lieberman was elected in democratic elections, unlike leaders of Arab countries. He only proposed to make loyalty a condition of citizenship. Egypt kicked out all its Jews without asking if they are loyal or not, and Jordan and Saudi Arabia do not allow any Jews to become citizens. The "Moderate" government of Mahmoud Abbas teaches Palestinian children that Haifa is the largest port in **PALESTINE.**

 

=================

 

Analyzing the AP anti-Israel bias

http://www.yourish.com/2009/09/04/8729

 

Meryl Yourish @ 1:30 pm

The subtleties of the AP anti-Israel bias are always in evidence, no matter who the writer, no matter what the subject. Witness:

The gist of the article is a debate between Israeli president and former Prime Minister Shimon Peres, and the Secretary-General of the Arab League, Amr Moussa. But before we get to all that, we have to have the set-up. First, tar Netanyahu as the one preventing peace because -wait for it- he refuses to stop building settlements.

The difficulty has been compounded by the fact that in March a right-leaning government replaced the previous more moderate one in Israel.

Several months ago, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu reluctantly agreed to accept the principle of a Palestinian state – a position his predecessors had already adopted but his Likud party has not – but said it would have to have limits on its rights to have a military or control its airspace.

Next, give Moussa a chance to respond to the above, but don't have Peres respond to it. Have Peres talk about a completely different topic.

Then, slam Peres and compliment Moussa, almost in the same breath (but while allowing Moussa to accuse the Israelis of duplicity):

Peres – pushing the boundaries on a role that is meant to be ceremonial and somewhat above the political and diplomatic fray – argued that even the borders initially delineated for the Palestinian state could be considered provisional and ultimately expanded.

"You want us to believe that?" thundered the urbane Moussa. "Another one of the tricks!"

Another way of telling which way the article is biased: There are ten paragraphs that contain quotes or paraphrases by Moussa. There are only six containing Peres' quotes or paraphrases—and the article is titled "Peres: Palestinian state first, full peace later."

I think, though, the thing that really got me is describing Moussa as "urbane" right after implying that Peres isn't acting in his government's best interest. In point of fact, nobody in Israel is complaining that Peres is overstepping his bounds, or if they have, I haven't seen it. But don't let the facts get in the way of a good anti-Israel slap.

The Associated Press: the anti-Israel Energizer bunny. They just never stop.