Posted by: melissacb | July 26, 2009

Subtle Means

I actually wanted to raise another type of discussion on media bias. I havent ever followed the medias coverage of this issue too closely but I’m curious as to whether or not the media falls in line behind the governments stance or if they deliver as unbiased a message as possible. The issue I’m talking about is the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The US Government supports the Israeli State. But the media recognizes a Palistine. And there are a couple of devils advocate questions I’d like to raise on the issue. 

1. Language choice. Does even the choice of calling it Israel show a bias. If not a conservative bias then at least a Western bias?

2. (I mean no offense with this question) But do you think that our medias coverage is affected not only by corporate influence but also possibly by the large and powerful Jewish population in media and entertainment?

3. Should networks like Al Jazzera be considered just as important in these types of dicussions? I mean, whether you like Al Jaz or not, if you ever wanted a completely different take on the same story thats the network to go to.

Just some thoughts. Again, I’m not terribly well versed in this area. But I’m curious if we could see a more subtle push of bias in this circumstance…

Advertisements

Responses

  1. The second question you ask is something I’ve been meaning to bring up in class, but was hesitant as well because I didn’t want to offend anyone. As someone from Arab descent it’s kind of frustrating to me how the only opinion you see in the news is the Israeli one. I’ll try to look into this too.

  2. You can find some information on this in the work of Mearsheimer and Walt on the Israel Lobby which started as an academic article and turned into popular and controversial book.

    You can read a shortened version of the article here:
    http://acme.highpoint.edu/~msetzler/AFP/AFPreads/IsraelLobbyShort06.pdf

    The book is available in the library.

    Also, you may want to look up information on the nomination and subsequent withdrawal of Chas Freeman from position of chairman of the National Intelligence Council. A withdrawal Ambassador Freeman blamed on lies and distortions coming from prominent pro-Israel media outlets and pundits:

    http://walt.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2009/03/11/on_chas_freemans_withdrawal

  3. I think I’m going to check out that book.

    One thing that I thought was a good point in the shortened version was;

    ” ‘Terrorism’ is not a single adversary, but a tactic employed by a wide array of political groups. The
    terrorist organisations that threaten Israel do not threaten the United States, except when it intervenes
    against them (as in Lebanon in 1982) ”

    When you think about it, it really doesn’t make sense that this strong relationship exists, because in actuality, what benefit does Israel provide for us? Unless I’m missing something, I guess I’ll have to read to find out, but it just doesn’t add up.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Categories

%d bloggers like this: