Is the US media pro Israel?

[Loopy]

No? How would you prove it. Don't just point to the Camera web site.

[NewsGuy]

Originally posted by Loopy
No? How would you prove it. Don't just point to the Camera web site.

The U.S. press is definitely NOT pro-Israel, IMO.

All too typical Reuters, AP or CNN headlines:

"4 killed in fresh Mideast violence"
(When a Palestinian suicide bomber kills 3 Israelis)

"20 Israelis killed in terrorist attack -- Both sides are to blame"

"Israelis kill 2 Palestinians"
(No mention that the Palestinians had bombs strapped to their bodies and were caught cutting the fence to enter an Israeli settlement)

"Israel kills Palestinian teen"
(No mention that the 17 yr. old Palestinian teen was throwing a fire-bomb or grenade point blank at an 18 yr. old Israeli soldier)

There are numerous more such examples showing that the U.S. press is often much more concerned with its syndication deals in Arab markets than to fairness in reporting the news.

[solrizzo]

we americans dont really think (or care) if the media reports 20 israelies killed --pakistan to blame--5 iraquis blown up-syria to blame, BLAH--BLAH -BLAH.-WE DONT CARE ANYMORE!!!

and by the way....the american people agree with this--and we are not getting over sept.--everyone ive talked to wants severe action--nothing is getting done--blowing up caves aint cuttin it..

[NewsGuy]

Originally posted by solrizzo
we americans dont really think...


About 90% of the members of this forum are Americans, so please don't feel that you need to tell us how we feel or think about issues.

Americans like us sure do care about problems in the Middle East. When we go to our local neighborhood Amoco station and fill up with Arab oil from countries who hate the U.S. and threaten our economy, then Middle Eastern issues affect us. When half of our NYSE and NASDAQ companies' stocks are owned by Saudi princes with anti-American sentiment, then yes, it concerns us.

So far as who is to blame exactly for the Middle East conflict, and who cares about whether 20 Israelis are being murdered by Arab terrorists, you can see from Sept. 11 that when the U.S. and the world turns a blind eye to Islamic terrorism, then it comes back to haunt the entire world in a very tragic way.

Had we as Americans really supported Israel and rooted out Arab terrorism 20 or 30 years ago, perhaps the Sept. 11th would not have occurred.

Perhaps even if we stood up to Iran and its Ayatollah-- the original source of Islamic terrorism (and bin Laden's inspiration) -- when they took our embassy hostage, then maybe Spet. 11th would not have happened.

These are just some of the reasons that press coverage and public perception of the Middle East conflict, do in fact matter very much to Americans like us.

[solrizzo]

another media problem:the news shows afgan people(always shows a kid)that have been injured by u.s. bombing.when i see this i crack a smile.they owe us 5000 lives---why dont we show human arms and heads and bodies that they pull out of the WTC everyday on tv????

[NewsGuy]

Of all the news stories to run in their top slot, there the BBC goes again with Arafat's sad face as the top story, how he was barred from Christmas celebrations in Bethlehem by the evil Israelis.

The fact that today the FBI confirmed that the Islamic terrorist Tariq Raja did in fact have high-grade explosives in his shoe which he attempted to detonate on a full American Airlines flight, was no match to the Arafat story for the BBC. The foiled terrorist attempt story was dropped way down to the 5th story, while the anti-Israel story rides first as the most significant news story of the day.

Shame on the BBC.

[Vic]

An amusing read:


US media: whose side are they on?
by Brendan O'Neill
14 May 2002

It is time to deliver a message to the New York Times', said US Rabbi Haskell Lookstein at the end of last year, 'a way to let its editors and owners know we are upset and taking action' (1).

Lookstein accused the New York Times of having a 'persistent bias against Israel' in its Middle Eastern coverage, claiming that its reporting on the Arab-Israeli conflict today is 'just as deplorable as its coverage of the Holocaust was years ago' (2). A 'boycott should start immediately', said Lookstein, calling on New York Jews to stop buying the Times, cancel their subscriptions, and send a 'symbolic' message to 'irresponsible editors everywhere' (3).

But on 12 April 2002, the US media group Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR) accused the New York Times of being consistently pro-Israel. 'By its headline choice, the Times suggested that the deaths of 23 Israelis…are more important than the deaths of 100 Palestinians', said FAIR, after analysing the paper's Middle East headlines and finding that Israeli deaths were likely to get an A1 (big) headline, while Palestinian deaths tended to get a sub (not so big) headline (4).

Then on 6 May 2002, web periodical The Idler accused the New York Times of publishing 'Palestinian propaganda'. 'Reporting [has] focused heavily on Palestinian suffering while continually minimising the personal toll on Israelis', said The Idler, claiming that 'the number and prominence of news stories and photographs regularly cast Palestinians as blameless victims of Israeli aggression.' (5)

But in April 2002, one US commentator accused the New York Times of being a propaganda machine for Israel. 'In a time of crisis, [Ariel] Sharon has chosen an unusual way to communicate with the USA…. He uses New York Times columnist and ideological soulmate William Safire as a press secretary', wrote the Boston Globe media correspondent, accusing Safire of 'serving as an unabashed propaganda outlet for the hardline Israeli leader' (6).

...

continued on: http://www.spiked-online.com/Articles/00000006D8E7.htm

[Morpheus]

Originally posted by solrizzo
we americans dont really think

That's a fact :D

[Vic]

Originally posted by Morpheus
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former