quote:

Originally posted by Viber and about the 17 pal" getting killed during the hodna - i would like to see articles from decent places about it 10x

i still cant find articles about thoes 17 pal" who were killed by israel during the hodna

quote:

Originally posted by Viber i still cant find articles about thoes 17 pal" who were killed by israel during the hodna

Funny thing is niether have I. Someone please confirm that article, as my search have turned up fruitless. If the case is that no other sources can confirm this information, than I will delete that posted article.

___________________
Signature Suspended as it was deemed offensive.

quote:

Originally posted by melech_mike Funny thing is niether have I. Someone please confirm that article, as my search have turned up fruitless. If the case is that no other sources can confirm this information, than I will delete that posted article.

no one has proven the stats right from that story,i think you need to delete it..

quote:

Originally posted by Cyrus King Melech-mike.. you just got raped! Blik.. i actually thought that myself when i read it

LOL!

___________________

The Israeli government's startling announcement that the Palestinian perpetrators of the (Sept. 9) dual terror attacks in Tsrifin (7 murdered, 30 wounded) and Jerusalem's Caf¨¦ Hillel (8 murdered, 50 wounded) were both, just six months ago, released from administrative detention in an Israeli prison.

INS AND OUTS OF
CHOOSING THE NEWS

Journalists covering the Mideast conflict have to answer a hard question each day: "Given the range of newsworthy items that constantly emerge, what should I run with, what's my story?" Whatever they deem "in" will be zapped to tens of thousands of newspapers, radio stations and TV screens worldwide; what's ruled "out" will disappear from world consciousness. This, in a nutshell, is how the media's content decisions shape public opinion.

In the past week, such decisions on three major topics fell into a curious pattern ¨D when the news item challenged Israeli policy, it made it "in," but when the item bolstered Israeli policy, it was deemed "out":

1) Israeli Restrictions on Palestinians

IN: Both Reuters and the Associated Press released articles on September 8 trumpeting a new Amnesty International report that condemned, among other IDF practices, Israel's use of administrative detention against Palestinians active in terror organizations.

OUT: The Israeli government's startling announcement that the Palestinian perpetrators of the (Sept. 9) dual terror attacks in Tsrifin (7 murdered, 30 wounded) and Jerusalem's Caf¨¦ Hillel (8 murdered, 50 wounded) were both, just six months ago, released from administrative detention in an Israeli prison.

Israeli policy is to continue administrative detention when necessary. The media's method of selective reporting, however, leaves Israeli policy woefully unexplained.

2) Arafat and Peace

IN: Both Reuters and AP (Sept. 13) painted Yassir Arafat as a peace-lover under siege. AP's headline was "Arafat Urges Israel to Return to Peace Talks," while Reuters quotes Arafat saying, "I appeal to you the Israeli people, together we can make peace."

OUT: That very day (Sept. 13), masked gunmen from Arafat's own Fatah movement stormed the TV station Al Aribiya in Ramallah, held the employees at gunpoint, then systematically destroyed their equipment as "a warning" for unflattering reports on the PA. Acknowledging his involvement, Arafat later apologized to Al Aribiya in the middle of the night.

[The media frequently quote voices of dissent within Israeli politics, but almost never bring equivalent Palestinian dissent. For example, also deemed "out" this week was a remarkable voice of protest from a prominent Palestinian journalist, who wrote an article in a Palestinian daily critical of the Arafat-led PA's "all or nothing" policy. Said Tawfiq Abu Bakr, "It is difficult to find a greater and more deeply rooted culture of self-deception than that in our Arab and Palestinian arena; a culture of daydreams in the height of a burning summer. People cling stubbornly to rosy dreams and delude themselves that these are the facts."]

Israeli policy is to remove Arafat, as an obstacle to peace, enemy of Palestinian moderation, and undemocratic strongman. The media's method of selective reporting, however, leaves Israeli policy woefully unexplained.

3) Palestinian Schoolchildren

IN: Both Reuters and AP reported large gatherings of Ramallah schoolchildren rallying in support of Yassir Arafat (Sept. 13). AP adds the detail that the children shouted "With our souls and our blood we defend Abu Ammar [Arafat's nom de guerre]," while Arafat "waved and blew kisses from a window."


OUT: The Jerusalem Post reported that the children had some other things to say (which apparently didn't interest AP and Reuters): "I'm prepared to go to the Jews myself and to kill them wherever they are," and "At school they tell us, go to liberate Palestine...We have to carry out suicide attacks because the Jews are killing us."

And outside Arafat's compound, one group of supporters shouted, "We will sacrifice millions of martyrs on the road to Jerusalem."

Israeli policy is to remove Arafat's grip on Palestinian culture, in order to eliminate the ongoing incitement in textbooks and classrooms calling for the murder of Israeli citizens. The media's method of selective reporting, however, leaves Israeli policy woefully unexplained.

Comments to Associated Press: [email protected][/email]
Comments to Reuters: [email][email protected]

___________________
Signature Suspended as it was deemed offensive.

ROSH HASHANA NIGHTMARE


On Friday night (Sept. 26), an Islamic Jihad terrorist opened fire on a West Bank (Negohot) home filled with families sharing a Jewish New Year meal, murdering 7-month-old Shaked Abraham and 26-year-old Eyal Yerberbaum.

Media reports included many of the disturbing breaches of fair journalism that have characterized coverage of the past three years of Palestinian violence:

¯ BBC's headline, "Three Dead in West Bank Attack," presents a gross moral equivalence between the terrorist and victims ¯ all of whom are grouped together, without specifying that one of the "three dead" murdered the other two in cold blood.

Further, the BBC headline fails to identify either the (Arab) attacker or the (Jewish) victims. Nor does BBC mention the newsworthy fact that one victim was a baby.

Given this most benign, nondescript headline, we can only conclude one of two possibilities: 1) the BBC headline writer is inept, unable to capture the essence of the incident, or 2) BBC purposely drafted this headline in keeping with an agenda to whitewash acts of Palestinian terror and Israeli victimhood.

Comments to: [email protected][/email]

¯ Reuters included this background information to rationalize the terrorist act:

"Palestinians regard Jewish settlements in the West Bank and Gaza Strip as major obstacles to peace and have regularly attacked them."

Reuters' description suggests ¯ preposterously ¯ that Palestinian terrorists perpetrate the willful murder of civilians out of a quest for peace.

Comments to: [email][email protected]

While the Palestinian terror continues, it is unsettling to see the media's pattern of cloudy headlines and rationalization of barbaric terrorism continue apace.

THE 10 PRINCIPLES OF MEDIA PATROLLING THE MID-EAST CONFLICT

Put yourself in the shoes of a reporter or editor. They are more receptive to constructive criticism than they are to pressure. Don't just demand that the media be pro-Israel -- but rather, factual, impartial, and honest. Always ask yourself: What would make this report better? Show the news agency not only what's wrong with their story, but how there is a more balanced alternative. One way to do this is by showing how their competitors reported the story more fairly. This is this difference between complaining and constructive criticism.

Mobilize a local monitoring group to increase your impact. Build an email list and alert the entire group when bias is spotted. This is the principle behind HonestReporting: One person acting alone may not be able to make a difference, but hundreds or thousands working together can. Be in touch with others from your city, for coordinated patrol activities.

Clearly document any bias you see. Keep a log-book and note the specific article (with URL), or the exact date and time of a broadcast. What exactly did the reporter say? Then pinpoint why it is a problem, by citing relevant facts, etc. Also note examples of excellent reporting.

You will never be able to convince the media to do things 100% your way. Refrain from nitpicking little points. Instead, pick one point that is the key to many others. For example, demanding that suicide bombers be labeled "terrorists" frames the conflict in completely different terms. Another example is contrasting Palestinian corruption and incitement with Israeli democracy. Choose your main battle and hammer away until your point is heard.

Conduct an extensive study of your local media to determine if there is an objective pattern of bias. Analyze every article for one month, and systematically tabulate the frequency of photos for each side, the frequency of spokespeople quoted, etc. Individual examples intuitively indicate anti-Israel bias, but the typical response from media agencies is: "Our reporters are under extreme deadline pressure, and occasionally there will be an error in judgment. But it all balances out -- sometimes skewed toward one side, and sometimes toward the other. But overall, our reporting is 100 percent fair and impartial." This month-long content analyses will lay rest to that claim.

Arrange a meeting with local writers and editors to express your concerns, to better explain the Israeli position, and to hold the newspaper accountable for what it publishes. Formulate a name for your group -- e.g. the Gotham City Concerned Citizens Coalition; this demonstrates broad-based community support for your position. At the meeting, make your case persuasively and with as much documentation as possible; present your month-long content analyses. Instead of attacking the newspaper's character, focus on their work and appeal to their professional integrity. A newspaper's entire ability to stay in business is based on their perception of being accurate and impartial. If you have evidence to the contrary, they will listen.

Meeting: Phase Two. At the end of the meeting, make them a deal: If they will agree to regular meetings, you will promise to restrain your rapid-response team and to restrict your complaints to only major errors. This takes tremendous pressure off the media, who abhors beings flooded with email complaints and all the bad publicity. This also creates an ongoing dialogue, whereby local editors will eventually turn to HonestReporting activists as a resource on the Israeli perspective. You can then encourage local editors and reporters to visit Israel to see the complex issues first hand. Offer to help plan their itinerary and meet former local citizens who now live in Israel. And you can invite local reporters to meet with visiting Israeli academics or decision-makers.

If the media agency refuses to meet with you, or if they continue to display a anti-Israel bias, then consider a public protest. This may take the form of a rally in front of their building (this must be coordinated with the local police department), or it may involve a campaign to cancel subscriptions (even for one day). Beware, however, that these methods can have a negative backlash, as it strikes some people as an attempt to limit freedom of the press. These tactics must be used wisely, and only when other methods have failed to produce results.

Don't limit yourself to print and broadcast media. Make your voice heard as well in Internet chat rooms, bulletin boards, and radio call-in shows. Hand out informational flyers at your local community center, school, and house of worship.

Expand your horizons. Get your news from a variety of sources in order to get a good sense of how different media groups promote different views. Also visit pro-Palestinian websites (e.g. ElectronicIntifada.net) to see how the other side is operating, and the arguments they use. You can also use this information to encourage your local media to report examples of incitement in the Arab world.
* * *

HOW TO ANALYZE THE MEDIA

You click on MSNBC.com and notice a hot new development in the Mideast. How should you go about analyzing the news report? There are certain questions you can keep in mind that may reveal underlying bias. For example:

Are acts of violence directed against civilians termed "terror"? If not, does this conform to the media's policy regarding other areas of conflict around the world?

In reporting violence, is the sequence of events clear, as to which side was attacked and which side retaliated?

Is sympathy being elicited for one side of the conflict, through the portrayal of its victims in humanizing terms (e.g. including personal information like the victim's name, age, familial relationship, or profession)?

Though both sides blame each other for perpetrating the violence, is one side portrayed as the more violent aggressor?

Are the perpetrators of violence described in passive or active terms?

Does the media attempt to give justification for an act of violence -- e.g. for reasons of poverty, frustration, or national liberation?

Are suicide bombers and collaborators included in Palestinian casualty counts? Are causality counts expressed unqualified, or is a distinction made between combatants and civilians?

Is "equal time" granted to both sides of the conflict, or is one side given preferential treatment -- hence lending more weight and credibility to that side's position?

When one side makes a claim, is the other side given a chance to refute, or does the claim stand unchallenged? Does one side usually "get the last word"?

Does the media quote dissenting or extremist opinions within each camp, or does the media only quote moderate voices that parrot the leadership's line?

Does the headline skew the story by failing to identify which side was the aggressor and which side the victim?

Photos and captions: Are these pertinent to the story, or do they diverge from the main story and garner out-of-context sympathy for one side or the other?

And finally, look specifically for the "7 Violations of Media Objectivity":

Did the story contain misleading definitions and terminology?
Was the reporting one-sided and imbalanced?
Did the reporter editorialize in what was supposed to be an objective news story?
Did the reporter fail to provide proper background and context?
Was key information missing (selective omission)?
Did the reporter use true facts to draw false conclusions?
Did the reporter distort the facts?
* * *


TIPS FOR WRITING GOOD LETTERS

Tips adapted from Camera.org

Be quick. Respond while the issue is still fresh. Ideally, try to send your letter within 24 hours of publication of the article.

Be clear. If you cannot summarize your message in one or two sentences, it's not clear enough in your mind. Pinpoint in stark, unambiguous terms what you want to communicate.

Be specific. Why was the article unfair? Did it show lack of context, imbalanced reporting, or omission of key facts? For example: "Your report inappropriately quoted only pro-Palestinian sources, leaving the Israeli position unrepresented."

Be concise. Most publications will not print a letter to the editor longer than 250 words. Editors are more likely to publish a letter that they don't have to spend time shortening.

Be focused. While an article may contain numerous instances of bias, focus your critique on just one or two. It's better to fully explain one point than to inadequately cover five.

Know the goal. You want your letter to inspire the media to change. When possible, ask the media to issue a correction based on your points. A good way to end your letter is to ask: "Can I expect a rethinking of your editorial policy on this point?"

Request a reply. Let the media know there is a consequence to biased reporting -- even if the consequence is having to answer hundreds of e-mails! You could end your letter with: "I would appreciate a response explaining why you have allowed such a biased article to appear in your fine publication."

Stick to the facts. Preserve the integrity of the HonestReporting campaign by keeping your comments clean and respectful. Hostile or overly-emotional language is counter-productive. Accusing the media of anti-Semitism will always be met with great resistance (besides being frequently untrue). This is not the place to vent your frustration.

Write as a concerned individual. Mentioning that you are part of an organized campaign may lessen the impact of your letter.

Use the CC button. Maximize your efforts by sending a copy of your letter not just to the editor, but also to the reporter, foreign editor, publisher, and even advertisers and members of Congress.

Include contact info. Before publishing a letter, most papers will call to verify that you wrote it. Remember to include your full name, title (if applicable), address, and daytime phone number.

Follow up. When possible, follow up with a phone call to the comments editor to ask if your letter will be published. If the editor doesn't remember your letter, offer to read it over the phone.

Keep us in the loop. Whenever you receive a response to your correspondence (other than a simple acknowledgement), send a copy of that response along with your original correspondence, to: [email protected]

Good luck!

Word! Things just aren't the same without honest reporting

/looking forward to the flaming

___________________
Retro ...

who is this clown?

this is a damn good thread so informative!

i know the guys who made honestreporting they are working on a new project, to help free the world... the media is goign to be not so important anymore in a few years.. there will be groups that truly cater to different world issues, you will hear everything directly from them....

at least that is a theory...

___________________
TORAHTRANCE CREW!

On eve of Yom-Kippur, 19 Israelis killed, at least 60 injured, 9 seriously, when Palestinian bomber blew herself up, Saturday, in crowded Maxim restaurant in Northern city of Haifa.

These are 18 of the Israelis murdered on October 4th Haifa bombing attack: Bruria Zer-Aviv, 59, her son Bezalel Zer-Aviv, 30, his wife Keren Zer-Aviv, 29, and both their children, Liran, 4, and Noya, 1 year old all from Kibbutz Yagur, Ze'ev Almog, 61, his wife Ruth Almog, 60, their son Moshe Almog, 43, and grandson Tomer, 9, all from Haifa, Mark Biano, 29, and his wife, Naomi Biano, 25, Haifa, Nir Regev, 25, Nahariya, Osama Najar, 27, Haifa, Matanas Karkabi, 29, Haifa, Hana Naim Francis, 40, Fassouta, Sherbel Matar, 23, Fassouta, Zvi Bahat, 35, Haifa, and Irena Sofrin, 38, Kiriat Bialik.


horrible news...
But in any case arafat needs to be expelled, and the entire idea of 'palestinian' needs to go to where it came from! THE THIN AIR!

look at this picture, it is from a 'palestinian' newspaper. This is the message they send within their own people.
check http://www.pmw.org.il/new/Latest%20bulletin.html#4year for all the info.

___________________
TORAHTRANCE CREW!