Connect with us

RSS

Middle East War Reporting: Avoiding the Pitfalls

Illustrative: Thousands of anti-Israel demonstrators from the Midwest gather in support of Palestinians and hold a rally and march through the Loop in Chicago on Oct. 21, 2023. Photo: Alexandra Buxbaum/Sipa USA via Reuters Connect

Since Hamas’s unprecedented onslaught in Israel on Oct. 7, the Jewish state has been forced into a struggle to ensure its survival, to free hostages abducted to Gaza, and to disarm terrorists of their ability to again imperil Israelis and Palestinians alike.

At the same time, information warfare has dramatically escalated on both social media and traditional news platforms. Rumors, misinformation, and false equivalence between Israel and Hamas have fed a surge of global antisemitism and undermined international support for Israel’s obligation to defend itself.

Journalism is vital in democratic societies — and war coverage presents immense challenges. But with the stakes of reporting so high, news correspondents bear the responsibility of ensuring accuracy and comprehensiveness in reports.

Here are seven guidelines that all news outlets should adopt to avoid common pitfalls in reporting on this complex and dynamic story.

One: Question Hamas statistics. Fatality figures and other “official” claims from Gaza, including the classification of casualties as civilians, must not be accepted uncritically — and need to be relayed as unconfirmed assertions of Hamas-controlled entities. Since 2007, Hamas has ruled Gaza. Like other malign actors with an interest in manipulating public perceptions, Hamas has made obvious its unreliability as a source of unvarnished data.

Two: Authenticate photos and footage. Caution must also apply to visual material from sources affiliated or aligned with Hamas, which can be staged or misleading. The initial media misrepresentation of the Oct. 17 explosion outside Gaza’s Al-Ahli Hospital demonstrated this hazard. Similarly, reports of shortages in Gaza’s civilian needs must account for the substantial aid long channeled to the Strip, and Hamas’ seemingly unimpeded ability to finance terrorist infrastructure and missiles.

Three: Terror is terror. If attacks similar to Hamas’ — deliberate, indiscriminate carnage among civilians, for ideological reasons — were to be described as terrorism elsewhere, the same must be done when victims are Israeli. Hamas’ atrocities have mimicked or even surpassed attacks by Islamist extremists in other settings, and are undergirded by a common doctrinal framework, reflected in Hamas’ own charter and its leaders’ pronouncements.

Four: “It’s (not) the occupation, stupid.” It’s essential to explain that Hamas’ attacks cannot correctly be attributed to “Israeli occupation.” Israel withdrew completely from Gaza — including all soldiers and Jewish settlements — in 2005. Since then, Hamas has only continued to intensify attacks targeting Israeli civilians. Its attacks have led to Israel’s defensive measures. Hamas’ theology openly rejects Israel’s existence within any borders. After the Gaza withdrawal, Israel again offered Palestinians full statehood in 2000 and 2008.

Five: Numbers tell only part of a story. The legality and intentions of Israeli counter-terrorism efforts cannot be assessed by simplistically comparing Israeli and Palestinian losses. A “scoreboard” approach to warring parties has not been applied to other difficult conflicts — whether World War II, the war in Ukraine, or US operations against Al-Qaeda after 9/11. Hamas deliberately hides and fires from among Palestinian civilians, and unlike Hamas, Israel has sought to minimize civilian casualties by warning non-combatants to evacuate battle zones. International law does not grant attackers immunity through taking human shields, as doing so would only encourage that tactic.

Six: Separate politics from truth. Some perceived arbiters of justice and legitimacy, like United Nations resolutions, must also be taken with a grain of salt — and reported with full context. The UN may well censure Israel, but news consumers need to know that an automatic majority of nearly 60 Arab and Muslim states has the UN routinely condemn the Jewish state — the Middle East’s only democracy — more than all other countries combined. (Too often, other entities, from academic bodies to labor unions, simply follow suit.) It is worth also remembering that the size of street demonstrations backing one side or another may reflect demographic realities rather than the “justness” of a certain party to the conflict.

Seven: It’s not just “war in Gaza.” The conflict, and conditions of humanitarian urgency, must not be presented only through a narrow Gazan prism. Attacks on Israel and Israelis did not begin or end on Oct. 7. Some 240 innocent Israelis, and others, continue to be held hostage in Gaza in unimaginable conditions — and rockets from Hamas in Gaza and Hezbollah in Lebanon (both Iranian proxies), continue to terrorize millions of civilians inside Israel.

It’s said that war is hell, and conflict reporting is little better.

The “fog of war” is undeniable. Although all protagonists’ emotions run high, so do the stakes of consistent professionalism in news coverage.

For the sake of an informed public and policymakers alike, reports on the Middle East must consistently convey the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

David J. Michaels is Director of U.N. and Intercommunal Affairs at B’nai B’rith International

The post Middle East War Reporting: Avoiding the Pitfalls first appeared on Algemeiner.com.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

Leave a Reply

RSS

McGill cancels talk with former Hamas insider turned Israel advocate, citing fears of violence

McGill University has canceled an on-campus event planned by Jewish students—and temporarily halted bookings for all extracurricular activities—following threats of violence along with a death threat, as outlined in a […]

The post McGill cancels talk with former Hamas insider turned Israel advocate, citing fears of violence appeared first on The Canadian Jewish News.

Continue Reading

RSS

US Lawmakers Introduce Bipartisan Bill to Strip Funding From Universities That Boycott Israel

US Rep. Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ) at a press conference in Bergenfield, New Jersey, US on June 5, 2023. Photo: Kyle Mazza/NurPhoto via Reuters Connect

US Reps. Virginia Foxx (R-NC) and Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ) on Tuesday introduced bipartisan legislation to cut off federal funding from universities that engage in boycotts of Israel.

The legislation, titled “The Protect Economic Freedom Act,” would render universities that participate in the boycott, divestment, and sanctions (BDS) movement against Israel ineligible for federal funding under Title IV of the Higher Education Act, prohibiting them from receiving federal student aid. The bill would also mandate that colleges and universities submit evidence that they are not participating in commercial boycotts against the Jewish state. 

“Enough is enough. Appeasing the antisemitic mobs on college campuses threatens the safety of Jewish students and faculty and it undermines the relationship between the US and one of our strongest allies. If an institution is going to capitulate to the BDS movement, there will be consequences — starting with the Protect Economic Freedom Act,” Foxx, chairwoman of the House Committee on Education and the Workforce, said in a statement. 

Gottheimer added that the legislation is necessary to thwart the surging tide of antisemitism on college campuses. Although the lawmaker noted that students are allowed to engage in free expression regarding the ongoing war in Gaza, he argued that blanket boycotts against Israel endanger the lives of Jewish students and community members. 

“The goal of the antisemitic BDS movement is to annihilate the democratic State of Israel, America’s critical ally in the global fight against terror. While students and faculty are free to speak their minds and disagree on policy issues, we cannot allow antisemitism to run rampant and risk the safety and security of Jewish students, staff, faculty, and guests on college campuses,” Gottheimer said in a statement. “The new bipartisan Protect Economic Freedom Act will give the Department of Education a critical new tool to combat the antisemitic BDS movement on college campuses. Now more than ever, we must take the necessary steps to protect our Jewish community.”

The legislation instructs the US Department of Education to keep a record of universities that refuse to confirm their non-participation in anti-Israel boycotts. The list of universities in non-compliance with the legislation would be made publicly available. 

In the year following the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas’s massacre acrosssouthern Israel, universities across the country have found themselves embroiled in controversies regarding campus antisemitism. In the immediate aftermath of the terrorist attacks in Israel, hordes of students and faculty orchestrated protests and demonstrations condemning the Jewish state. Student groups at elite universities such as Harvard and Columbia issued statements blaming Israel for the attacks and expressing support for Hamas. 

Several high-profile universities have also shown a significant level of tolerance for anti-Jewish sentiment festering on their campuses. Northwestern University, for example, capitulated to demands of anti-Israel activists to remove Sabra Hummus from campus dining halls because of its connections to Israel. At Stanford University, Jewish students have reported being forced to condemn Israel before being allowed to enter campus parties. Students at the University of Pennsylvania and Brown University launched unsuccessful attempts to convince the university to divest endowment funds from companies tied to Israel.

The post US Lawmakers Introduce Bipartisan Bill to Strip Funding From Universities That Boycott Israel first appeared on Algemeiner.com.

Continue Reading

RSS

Harvard Chaplains Omit Antisemitism From Statement on Antisemitic Incident

Demonstrators take part in an “Emergency Rally: Stand With Palestinians Under Siege in Gaza,” amid the ongoing conflict between Israel and Hamas, at Harvard University in Cambridge, Massachusetts, US, Oct. 14, 2023. Photo: REUTERS/Brian Snyder

Harvard University’s Office of the Chaplain and Religious and Spiritual Life is being criticized by a rising Jewish civil rights activist for omitting any mention of antisemitism from a statement addressing antisemitic behavior.

The sharp words followed the office’s response to a hateful demonstration on campus in which pro-Hamas students stood outside Harvard Hillel and called for it to banned from campus. Such a demand is not new, as it began earlier this semester at the direction of the National Students for Justice in Palestine (NSJP) organization, which coordinates the lion’s share of anti-Zionist activity on college campuses.

As seen in footage of the demonstration, the students chanted “Zionists aren’t welcome here!” and held signs which accused the organization — the largest campus organization for Jewish students in the world — of embracing “war criminals” and genocide.

Addressing the behavior, Harvard Chaplains issued a statement, which is now being pointed to as a symbol of higher education’s indifference to the unique hatred of antisemitism, as well as its permutation as anti-Zionism.

“We have noticed a trend of expression in which entire groups of students are told they ‘are not welcome here’ because of their religious, cultural, ethnic, or political commitments and identities, or are targeted through acts of vandalism,” the office said, seemingly circumventing the matter at hand. “We find this trend disturbing and anathema to the dialogue and connection across lines of difference that must be a central value and practice of a pluralistic institution of higher learning.”

It continued, “Student groups who are singled out in this way experience such language and acts of vandalism as a painful attack that undermines the acceptance and flourishing of religious diversity here at Harvard. Let us all endeavor to care for one another in these divisive times.”

Recent Harvard graduate Shabbos Kestenbaum, who addressed the Republican National Convention in August to discuss the ways which progressive bias in higher education fosters anti-Zionism and anti-Western ideologies, described the statement as a moral failure in a post on X/Twitter on Tuesday.

“Disappointing,” he said. “After Harvard Jews were told by masked students ‘Zionists aren’t welcome here’ outside of the Hillel, the Chaplain Office finally released a statement that did not include the words Jew, Zionism, Israel, or antisemitism. A total abdication of religious responsibility.”

Kestenbaum noted in a later statement that Harvard’s chief diversity and inclusion officer, Sherri Ann Charleston, has so far declined to speak on the issue at all. He charged that when Charleston “isn’t plagiarizing, she and DEI normalize antisemitism,” referring to evidence, first reported by the Washington Free Beacon, that Charleston is a serial plagiarist who climbed the hierarchy of the higher education establishment by pilfering other people’s  scholarship.

Harvard University president Alan Garber — installed after former president Claudine Gay resigned following revelations that she is also a serial plagiarist — has, experts have said, been inconsistent in managing the campus’ unrest.

During summer, The Harvard Crimson reported that Harvard downgraded “disciplinary sanctions” it levied against several pro-Hamas protesters it suspended for illegally occupying Harvard Yard for nearly five weeks, a reversal of policy which defied the university’s previous statements regarding the matter. Unrepentant, the students, members of the group Harvard Out of Occupied Palestine (HOOP), celebrated the revocation of the punishments on social media and promised to disrupt the campus again.

Earlier this semester, however, Garber appeared to denounce a pro-Hamas student group which marked the anniversary of Hamas’s Oct. 7 attacks on Israel by praising the brutal invasion as an act of revolutionary justice that should be repeated until the Jewish state is destroyed, despite having earlier announced a new “institutional neutrality” policy which ostensibly prohibits the university from weighing in on contentious political issues. While Garber ultimately has said more than Gay when the same group praised the Oct. 7 massacre last academic year, his administration’s handling of campus antisemitism has been ambiguous, according to observers — and described even by students who benefited from its being so as “caving in.”

The university’s perceived failure to address antisemitism has had legal consequences.

Earlier this month, a lawsuit accusing it of ignoring antisemitism was cleared to proceed to discovery, a phase of the case which may unearth damaging revelations about how college officials discussed and crafted policy responses to anti-Jewish hatred before and after Hamas’s massacre across southern Israel last Oct. 7.

The case, filed by the Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law, centers on several incidents involving Harvard Kennedy School professor Marshall Ganz during the 2022-2023 academic year.

Ganz allegedly refused to accept a group project submitted by Israeli students for his course, titled “Organizing: People, Power, Change,” because they described Israel as a “liberal Jewish democracy.” He castigated the students over their premise, the Brandeis Center says, accusing them of “white supremacy” and denying them the chance to defend themselves. Later, Ganz allegedly forced the Israeli students to attend “a class exercise on Palestinian solidarity” and the taking of a class photograph in which their classmates and teaching fellows “wore ‘keffiyehs’ as a symbol of Palestinian support.”

During an investigation of the incidents, which Harvard delegated to a third party firm, Ganz admitted that he believed “that the students’ description of Israel as a Jewish democracy … was similar to ‘talking about a white supremacist state.’” The firm went on to determine that Ganz “denigrated” the Israeli students and fostered “a hostile learning environment,” conclusions which Harvard accepted but never acted on.

Follow Dion J. Pierre @DionJPierre.

The post Harvard Chaplains Omit Antisemitism From Statement on Antisemitic Incident first appeared on Algemeiner.com.

Continue Reading

Copyright © 2017 - 2023 Jewish Post & News