Media bias?

Zebra3

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-12300086

Israeli settlers 'shoot Palestinian teen' near Nablus

An 18-year-old shepherd has died after being shot by Israeli settlers near the West Bank city of Nablus, Palestinian officials say.

Now if the roles were reversed, I wonder would the Palestinian be a "terrorist" who had murdered the (illegal settler) jew?

:rolleyes:

orourkeda

Zebra3 wrote: »

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-12300086



Now if the roles were reversed, I wonder would the Palestinian be a "terrorist" who had murdered the (illegal settler) jew?

:rolleyes:

The same result though. Are the words used to report it really that important.

AnonoBoy

Zebra3 wrote: »

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-12300086

Now if the roles were reversed, I wonder would the Palestinian be a "terrorist" who had murdered the (illegal settler) jew?

:rolleyes:

I don't think I've seen the BBC refer to the Palestinians as 'terrorists'.

prinz

Zebra3 wrote: »

Now if the roles were reversed, I wonder would the Palestinian be a "terrorist" who had murdered the (illegal settler) jew?

Chances are it would have been. Murdering someone does not make you a terrorist. What we have here is what looks like a teenage kid going about his business being murdered by settlers. Pretty straightforward. The settlers will more than likely be held to account for their actions, as opposed to having a street party thrown back home.

Snakeblood

orourkeda wrote: »

The same result though. Are the words used to report it really that important.

Definitely. They influence how people feel about the issue. Unless there's a purely objective terminology used, you can slant an issue to the way you want people to feel about it.

A Dub in Glasgo

orourkeda wrote: »

The same result though. Are the words used to report it really that important.

Yes, why do you think governments and groups spend billions on media management?

Nodin

prinz wrote: »

The settlers will more than likely be held to account for their actions,............

Whats that based on....?

A Dub in Glasgo

Fantasy

LondonIrish90

Zebra3 wrote: »

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-12300086



Now if the roles were reversed, I wonder would the Palestinian be a "terrorist" who had murdered the (illegal settler) jew?

:rolleyes:

Good old Irish underhand anti-semetism rearing its head again. Could you have just left it at illegal settler, or Israeli? No, of course you couldn't. :rolleyes: Had to get something about them being a nasty Jew in didn't you!

A Dub in Glasgo

LondonIrish90 wrote: »

or Israeli? No, of course you couldn't.

Do you want him to be racist then?

prinz

Nodin wrote: »

Whats that based on....?

http://israelsoccupation.blogspot.com/2010/11/israeli-settler-convicted-of-kidnapping.html

They'll convict the son of a high profile pro-settlement campaginer with kidnapping and assault, but turn a blind eye to cold blooded murder?

http://www.haaretz.com/news/israel-police-arrest-settlers-for-assault-on-palestinian-farmers-1.247977

Assault..

http://www.turkishweekly.net/news/96071/-israeli-police-arrest-settlers-linked-to-mosque-attack.html

Vandalism..


http://english.pnn.ps/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=9155&Itemid=64

Settles arrested on suspicion of assault..

Lumen

Zebra3 wrote: »

Now if the roles were reversed, I wonder would the Palestinian be a "terrorist" who had murdered the (illegal settler) jew?

Not really sure what point you're making. Are you suggesting that the BBC are institutionally biased against Palestinians? That's a new one on me. Most of the output is extremely sympathetic to the Palestinian cause.

Zebra3

LondonIrish90 wrote: »

Good old Irish underhand anti-semetism rearing its head again. Could you have just left it at illegal settler, or Israeli? No, of course you couldn't. :rolleyes: Had to get something about them being a nasty Jew in didn't you!

Wow!! Straight out with the race card. Well done.

Now please explain how it's ok for the BBC to refer to them as "jewish settlers" but it's not ok for me to use the word "jew"?

Nodin

prinz wrote: »

http://israelsoccupation.blogspot.com/2010/11/israeli-settler-convicted-of-kidnapping.html

They'll convict the son of a high profile pro-settlement campaginer with kidnapping and assault, but turn a blind eye to cold blooded murder?

http://www.haaretz.com/news/israel-police-arrest-settlers-for-assault-on-palestinian-farmers-1.247977

http://www.turkishweekly.net/news/96071/-israeli-police-arrest-settlers-linked-to-mosque-attack.html


http://english.pnn.ps/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=9155&Itemid=64

Statistically, nothing happens 90% of the time. Therefore, odds are....
http://media.yesh-din.org/geninfo.asp?gencatid=20

Zebra3

Lumen wrote: »

Not really sure what point you're making. Are you suggesting that the BBC are institutionally biased against Palestinians? That's a new one on me. Most of the output is extremely sympathetic to the Palestinian cause.

I'm not aware of any BBC sympathy for the Palestinians.

Though it would be understandable considering they are under a foreign military occupation by a state that is not bothered (nor sanctioned) by being so flagrantly in breach of international law.

Rabies

orourkeda wrote: »

The same result though. Are the words used to report it really that important.

Very.

Media play a big part in wars

Nodin

Lumen wrote: »

Not really sure what point you're making. Are you suggesting that the BBC are institutionally biased against Palestinians? That's a new one on me. Most of the output is extremely sympathetic to the Palestinian cause.

It's not so much a bias, as that Palestinian violence is rarely explained in context, particularily on the TV news. Nor is it a problem consigned to the BBC and this particular conflict. The fact that - in relation to the West Bank and Arab East Jerusalem - one side is an occupying force, isn't often gone into. Its really the problem of the medium - you've two-three minutes to report on a single incident in a complex situation. It's thus hard to set a proper context.

karma_

Nodin wrote: »

Statistically, nothing happens 90% of the time. Therefore, odds are....
http://media.yesh-din.org/geninfo.asp?gencatid=20

They will of course bring to trial some settlers for a few of these incidents, give them a light slap on the wrist and this will placate the majority of the media, and guys on boards who can point to the odd trial and say, "look how things get done in a lawful state."

Then this incident will be forgotten about, then another similar incident takes place and we go though the same hoops again.

Lumen

Zebra3 wrote: »

I'm not aware of any BBC sympathy for the Palestinians.

Then you probably haven't consumed very much of their output.

BBC coverage gets torn to shreds regularly by right wingers for being hugely left-biased, and considered by left wingers to be completely unbiased.

Zebra3 wrote: »

Though it would be understandable considering they are under a foreign military occupation by a state that is not bothered (nor sanctioned) by being so flagrantly in breach of international law.

That's exactly the sort of statement the BBC comes out with all the time, so I'd say they agree with you.

I don't really care, TBH, but if you're going to make an accusation of bias it should be based on real examples not speculation.

prinz

Nodin wrote: »

Statistically, nothing happens 90% of the time. Therefore, odds are....
http://media.yesh-din.org/geninfo.asp?gencatid=20

What are the statistics of the P.A. invesitgating and punishing Palestinians for attacks on Israelis as a matter of interest? 10% is better than 0% no but the glass is always half empty? Which legal and judicial system would I have more faith in.... coming down on the Israeli side myself so far.

pikachucheeks

Snakeblood wrote: »

Definitely. They influence how people feel about the issue. Unless there's a purely objective terminology used...

Can media ever really be objective though?

I mean, they're choosing what stories are printed / broadcasted for the public to see and that selection process in itself can't be objective. You're deeming one story newsworthy and another not, which is a decision that impacts on the audience.

This thread needs a bit of Noam Chomksy.

karma_

prinz wrote: »

What are the statistics of the P.A. invesitgating and punishing Palestinians for attacks on Israelis as a matter of interest? 10% is better than 0% no but the glass is always half empty? Which legal and judicial system would I have more faith in.... coming down on the Israeli side myself so far.

No surprise there then so.

Lumen

pikachucheeks wrote: »

I mean, they're choosing what stories are printed / broadcasted for the public to see and that selection process in itself can't be objective. You're deeming one story newsworthy and another not, which is a decision that impacts on the audience.

Exactly. If the BBC were pro-Israel, they wouldn't have published the allegations in the first place, they'd have waited on the outcome of the Israeli police investigation.

Also, the picture of grieving relatives would be replaced by some unobjectionable picture of a hilltop with sheep on it, or some "chicks with guns" settler-totty.

JohnathanM

prinz wrote: »

Which legal and judicial system would I have more faith in....

Following your last post, you're being more that just a little disigenuous here. You would have faith in a legal system which has helped support state expansion in clear violation of international law? More fool you.

prinz wrote: »

...coming down on the Israeli side myself so far.

Hardly surprising. This is where you started.

A Dub in Glasgo

prinz wrote: »

coming down on the Israeli side myself so far.

Does a bear sh1te in the woods?

prinz

karma_ wrote: »

No surprise there then so.

Great contribution once again.

Nodin

prinz wrote: »

What are the statistics of the P.A. invesitgating and punishing Palestinians for attacks on Israelis as a matter of interest?

O - so we're playing 'it's ok, the other crowd are evil' because you can't admit your original assertion was incorrect? You really, really need to learn to admit being wrong. Not for my sake either, IMO.

You'll find there's a high level of co-operation between the PA and the Israelis. Rather nauseatingly so, in fact.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jan/25/israel-asked-palestinians-assassinate-militant
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jan/25/mi6-palestinian-papers-rejectionists-plan?intcmp=239

"The Guardian newspaper reported that Palestinians security forces have been working closely with the CIA to torture Palestinian dissenters. When Palestinians killed a settler last December, Abbas' forces worked "overtime" to find the culprits arresting hundreds in the process. A PA spokesperson described the security situation up to the attack as "nearly perfect," in reference to the diligent job of Palestinian security forces in preventing attacks against Israelis but ignoring the daily attacks Palestinians are subjected to at the hands of the Israeli military and settlers. Abbas' clampdown didn't prevent an Israeli death-squad from invading Nablus and killing in cold blood three Palestinians as an act of revenge."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jan/25/mi6-palestinian-papers-rejectionists-plan?intcmp=239

prinz

JohnathanM wrote: »

Following your last post, you're being more that just a little disigenuous here. You would have faith in a legal system which has helped support state expansion in clear violation of international law? More fool you. Hardly surprising. This is where you started.

If a friend or family member was murdered in Israel or in West Bank/Gaza, yeah I'd have more faith in the Israelis to catch and prosecute the killer.

Zebra3

pikachucheeks wrote: »

This thread needs a bit of Noam Chomksy.

Chomsky on the US-led attack on Iraq:

"If the media were unbiased, they would start every news report on the war on Iraq with the phrase "the illegal war on Iraq".

karma_

prinz wrote: »

Great contribution once again.

You got it babe.

prinz

Nodin wrote: »

O - so we're playing 'it's ok, the other crowd are evil' because you can't admit your original assertion was incorrect? You really, really need to learn to admit being wrong. Not for my sake either, IMO.

It was a genuine question. One which it appears you don't have an answer to. Perhaps we should wait until this poor kids murder has been dealt with one way or the other before start telling people they are wrong?

prinz

Nodin wrote: »

You'll find there's a high level of co-operation between the PA and the Israelis. Rather nauseatingly so, in fact.

You find it nauseating that they would try to catch murderers?

JohnathanM

prinz wrote: »

If a friend or family member was murdered in Israel or in West Bank/Gaza, yeah I'd have more faith in the Israelis to catch and prosecute the killer.

So your assertion is not anymore that Palestinian authorities do not seek to prosecute those who would attack Israel, but simply that they do not have a legal system of worth in place or even the moral standing to investigate a murder? You've removed the political angle, and simply want to make an unsubstatiated claim that the Israeli police force is somehow superior?

prinz

JohnathanM wrote: »

So your assertion is not anymore that Palestinian authorities do not seek to prosecute those who would attack Israel...

I never made that assertion. I simply asked a question, referring to the fact that the very possibility of bringing up statistics etc against the Israelis goes to show that they are, to some degree, transparent and follow some sort of due process (or not as the case may be), but at least there's a record of numbers and some public accountability so nodin there can show how 90% of claims against settlers aren't followed up.

JohnathanM wrote: »

but simply that they do not have a legal system of worth in place or even the moral standing to investigate a murder? You've removed the political angle, and simply want to make an unsubstatiated claim that the Israeli police force is somehow superior?

Are you going to make a substantiated claim that it isn't?

Nodin

prinz wrote: »

You find it nauseating that they would try to catch murderers?

They're clamping down on legitmate armed resistance to an occupation/colonisation of their own people. Vichy, essentially.

prinz wrote: »

It was a genuine question........

No, I'm afraid not.

prinz wrote: »

One which it appears you don't have an answer to........

I showed that the PA shares intelligence and co-operates fully with Israeli intelligence in clamping down on militants with its territory, which is indeed an answer.

prinz wrote: »

Perhaps we should wait until this poor kids murder has been dealt with one way or the other before start telling people they are wrong? ........

You stated

The settlers will more than likely be held to account for their actions, ........

Thats already shown not to be true. Should they be convicted of murder, it would in fact be a rare exception to the majority of cases, as shown here
http://media.yesh-din.org/geninfo.asp?gencatid=20

prinz wrote: »

If a friend or family member was murdered in Israel or in West Bank/Gaza, yeah I'd have more faith in the Israelis to catch and prosecute the killer. ........

Based on? I'm sure if they were killed by Palestinians they'd be all to co-operative, otherwise....

This man and 13 others of the same organisation were killed by the IDF
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/suffolk/4534620.stm
..no convictions....

Nodin

prinz wrote: »

I never made that assertion. I simply asked a question, referring to the fact that the very possibility of bringing up statistics etc against the Israelis goes to show that they are, to some degree, transparent and follow some sort of due process (or not as the case may be), but at least there's a record of numbers and some public accountability so nodin there can show how 90% of claims against settlers aren't followed up.

A rather pathetic attempt to move the goalposts.

You'll find that the system has no accountability to Palestinians, who are not dealt with by Israeli law.

JohnathanM

prinz wrote: »

I never made that assertion.

Reading it again I'll change "assertion" to "directed question".

prinz wrote: »

...they are, to some degree, transparent and follow some sort of due process (or not as the case may be), but at least there's a record.

Process and record is irrelevant when it doesn't serve to uphold law, and in Israel it very often does not as other posters have shown. I've already argued that the legal structure of Israel has supported illegal expansion and other acts in direct violation of international law. We can see very clearly that it has done it, and even read proceedings of crimes where there was no conviction. So what?

prinz wrote: »

Are you going to make a substantiated claim that it isn't?

I don't need to. Why would I?

prinz

Nodin wrote: »

They're clamping down on legitmate armed resistance to an occupation/colonisation of their own people. Vichy, essentially.....

Blowing up niteclubs, hotels, buses, supermarkets, etc is perhaps "legitimate armed resistance" in your twilight zone.

Nodin wrote: »

No, I'm afraid not......

Really? You can tell that? Oh wait, no you can't.

Nodin wrote: »

I showed that the PA shares intelligence and co-operates fully with Israeli intelligence in clamping down on militants with its territory, which is indeed an answer.......

It's not an answer. It's not even relevant to the question asked.

Nodin wrote: »

Thats already shown not to be true. Should they be convicted of murder, it would in fact be a rare exception to the majority of cases, as shown here
http://media.yesh-din.org/geninfo.asp?gencatid=20........

Do you have a breakdown of what that 10/90 is made up of? How many cold blooded murders are included in the 90% not followed up on?

Nodin wrote: »

Based on? I'm sure if they were killed by Palestinians they'd be all to co-operative, otherwise........

Based on?

Nodin wrote: »

This man and 13 others of the same organisation were killed by the IDF
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/suffolk/4534620.stm
..no convictions....

Yes, and there should have been...where does that leave us? How many people were convicted of the killing of Kevin Joyce?

prinz

JohnathanM wrote: »

Process and record is irrelevant when it doesn't serve to uphold law, and in Israel it very often does not as other posters have shown. I've already argued that the legal structure of Israel has supported illegal expansion and other acts in direct violation of international law. We can see very clearly that it has done it, and even read proceedings of crimes where there was no conviction. So what?

So nothing there would lead me to automatically assume the Israelis will ignore this murder in the OP. I'll believe that something will be done, others can sit back and believe nothing will be done. Only time will tell.

wes

Well, I think it would be appropriate to call this particular settler a terrorist, personally.

As for bias from the BBC, they aren't quite as pro-Palestinian as some supporters of Israel make them out to be. They just aren't 110% on the side of Israel, which to the more gun ho Israel supporters makes you completely biased against Israel.

As for this murder, the perepertrator will at best get a slap on the wrist, and thats if there is any punishment at all. As other posters have shown, settlers regularly act with impunity, and very often with the active support of the state of Israel.

Nodin

prinz wrote: »

.....................

Yes, and there should have been...where does that leave us? How many people were convicted of the killing of Kevin Joyce?

Kevin Joyce wasn't killed in the West Bank, or even the occupied territories. Kevin Joyce was killed before the PA was formed. Kevin Joyces killer was executed in 1984.

I find it rather repellent the way you need to use a man never buried to faciltate your need to shift the goalposts again.

You always get so frantic when you're exposed....

prinz wrote: »

.....................
So nothing there would lead me to automatically assume the Israelis will ignore this murder in the OP

Again, utterly incorrect, as noted by any number of Israeli and international organisations.

prinz

Nodin wrote: »

I find it rather repellent the way you need to use a man never buried to faciltate your need to shift the goalposts again.
You always get so frantic when you're exposed.....

Oh I get you now, it's only ok to use the unrelated deaths of people who were buried?

JohnathanM

prinz wrote: »

Oh I get you now, it's only ok to use the unrelated deaths of people who were buried?

That was the last of your limited credibility, gone.

prinz

JohnathanM wrote: »

That was the last of your limited credibility, gone.

Ouch. I feel really bad now. What do you think the killing of Iain Hook by an IDF sniper has to do with the case in the OP?

Nodin

prinz wrote: »

Ouch. I feel really bad now. What do you think the killing of Iain Hook by an IDF sniper has to do with the case in the OP?

Iain Hook and 13 others, for which nobody was ever convicted. You brought this into the thread by way of your comment

If a friend or family member was murdered in Israel or in West Bank/Gaza, yeah I'd have more faith in the Israelis to catch and prosecute the killer.

I was, rather obviously, showing that such faith is not based in fact.

prinz

Nodin wrote: »

Iain Hook and 13 others, for which nobody was ever convicted. You brought this into the thread by way of your comment
I was, rather obviously, showing that such faith is not based in fact.

...and how many unsolved murders are there in this country? Yet I still have faith in our legal system ( although sentencing, not so much).

Nodin

prinz wrote: »

...and how many unsolved murders are there in this country? Yet I still have faith in our legal system ( although sentencing, not so much).

O that's dire, dire stuff.

The direct comparison is 'How many unsolved murders are there committed by members of the Defence forces/Gardai in this country?' (The answer being none, that I'm aware of at any rate.)

prinz

Nodin wrote: »

O that's dire, dire stuff.
The direct comparison is 'How many unsolved murders are there committed
by members of the Defence forces/Gardai in this country?' (The answer being none, that I'm aware of at any rate.)

Indeed, which would in turn beg the question why you were using the actions of a trigger happy IDF sniper in direct comparison to the actions of a murdering settler? Now that we can't compare Defence forces with regular killers that is..

Nodin

prinz wrote: »

Indeed, which would in turn beg the question why you were using the actions of a trigger happy IDF sniper in direct comparison to the actions of a murdering settler? Now that we can't compare Defence forces with regular killers that is..

Another attempted goal post shift?

I explained exactly why I brought up the actions of Snipers back here
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=70334186&postcount=45

prinz

Nodin wrote: »

I explained exactly why I brought up the actions of Snipers back here
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=70334186&postcount=45

I still don't understand what a murder by an IDF sniper in Jenin, West Bank, has to do with anything? If my hypothetical family member/friend was knocking about a city in the West Bank, which only months before hand had been the seen of a battle, then yeah they would more than likely be killed by members of the IDF who may never be caught or prosetcuted, simply due to the firepower they lay down.

However I was in fact referring to John Doe tourist in Israel. Killed during a mugging for example.

Similarly I'd have faith in the justice system in the US invesitgating a street murder in downtown US city, but not the same faith in the US system in investigating a death in US-controlled areas of Afghanistan.

Plus I have acknowledged that someone should have been caught and faced justice for the murders of Iain Hook and his Palestinian coworkers.

Nodin

prinz wrote: »

I still don't understand what a murder by an IDF sniper in Jenin, West Bank, has to do with anything? If my hypothetical family member/friend was knocking about a city in the West Bank, which only months before hand had been the seen of a battle, then yeah they would more than likely be killed by members of the IDF who may never be caught or prosetcuted, simply due to the firepower they lay down..

A great number have been killed by direct rifle fire, frequently single shots to the head.

prinz wrote: »

However I was in fact referring to John Doe tourist in Israel. Killed during a mugging for example..

No, you stated

If a friend or family member was murdered in Israel or in West Bank/Gaza,

There were no caveats re it being confined to Israel, or a tourist, or a mugging. This is a tangent we went on by your comments.

And of course, your inability to say "I didn't know that" early on.

prinz wrote: »

Similarly I'd have faith in the justice system in the US invesitgating a street murder in downtown US city, but not the same faith in the US system in investigating a death in US-controlled areas of Afghanistan.,

Au contraire. The difference is rather more stark and depends one who the suspect is, or is believed to be, and who the victim is, or is believed to be.