PDA

View Full Version : Baised reporting: REUTERS



Leader
02 Jan 04,, 23:15
IGNOBLE AWARD WINNER: REUTERS

With over 200 news bureaus worldwide, Reuters stakes its claim as "the largest international multi-media news agency." Though Reuters' own editorial policy claims the agency's reporters "do not offer subjective opinion," and intend merely "to enable readers and viewers to form their own judgement," in fact Reuters' coverage of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is flagrantly biased against Israel. Some examples from 2003:

* In January, Reuters blamed Israel for "killing" Palestinian suicide bombers:

Iraq has paid millions of dollars to families of Palestinians, including those of suicide bombers, killed by Israeli forces since the start of the uprising in September 2000.

* As Israel prepared to build a wall to protect worshippers at Rachel's Tomb in Bethlehem, Reuters published this headline:

"Israel to Split Christ's Birthplace with Barrier"

To emphasize its (completely external) point, Reuters repeated the word "Christ" or "Christian" in each of the article's first four sentences.

* On Nov. 18, two Israeli soldiers were killed outside Bethlehem and a number of Palestinians were wounded in Gaza. Reuters had pictures of both events, but journalists who subscribe to Reuters' photo service were encouraged to publish the Palestinian victims in this email (emphasis added):


Dear User of the Reuters Pictures Archive,

Please find below a single picture presentation showing two Palestinians rushing a wounded Palestinian to hospital in the Rafah refugee camp in the southern part of the Gaza strip, November 18, 2003 :

http://www.honestreporting.com/images/gazavictim.jpg

* When Palestinian terrorist groups announced a hudna with the PA, Israel was not a party in the agreement, and the official road map demanded a full disarming of terror groups not a temporary hudna cease-fire. Yet Reuters took the opportunity to vilify Israel with the headline:

"Israel Pours Scorn on Truce With Militants"

And when Israel did show flexibility for Palestinian demands, above and beyond the roadmap's requirements? On Nov. 3, Reuters reported that Israel reinstated 15,000 Palestinian work permits, and included this comment in a news report:

150,000 Palestinians [previously] made a living in Israel, so Sunday's restoration of 15,000 Israeli work permits is still only a drop in the ocean.

Actually, 15,000 was fully 10%, and a risky loosening of anti-terror policy. Even the Palestinian official quoted by Reuters called it "an important step."

* * *

The previous examples are specific to particular articles, but Reuters' anti-Israel bias extends to general editorial policy on terminology and headlines:

REUTERS' TERMINOLOGY

Reuters' refusal to use the term "terrorism" or "terrorist" reached new levels of absurdity this year. In November, Reuters released a list of "Worst Guerilla Attacks since September 11" that omitted terror in Israel entirely.

But beyond distancing itself from the term "terror," Reuters regularly legitimized Palestinian terrorist groups and their murderous acts by ascribing to them a worthy (though false) motive the pursuit of independence:

The military wing of the Islamic militant group Hamas claimed responsibility for the attack in a statement faxed to Reuters. Hamas has spearheaded a 28-month-old Palestinian militant uprising against Israel for a state in Gaza and the West Bank. (Feb. 15 - emphasis added)

Or take this Oct. 3 Reuters photo and caption:

http://www.honestreporting.com/images/hamas.flags.jpg

Members of the Islamic movement Hamas burn the Israeli and the U.S. flag over a model of the Star of David during a march through the streets of the Jabalya refugee camp in Gaza and vow to continue the three-year-old uprising for statehood. (emphasis added)

Hamas makes it perfectly clear in their official charter that their goal is the destruction of the State of Israel, and not merely an independent Palestinian state. Legitimate liberation struggles do not target innocent civilians in a systematic manner. Yet Reuters persists in this charade, justifying the horrific terrorist acts.

The terminology even reaches articles addressing Israeli perspectives. After the tragic space shuttle explosion in February, Reuters described Israelis' sadness over the death of astronaut Ilan Ramon:

The launch of Ramon's space flight had virtually erased news of the country's woes, spreading space fever among Israelis embittered by a Palestinian uprising for statehood, a scandal-plagued national election and a domestic recession. (Feb. 2, emphasis added)

Israelis were not embittered by an "uprising for statehood." They were, as always, prepared to offer Palestinians a state. They were embittered by relentless Palestinian terror.

Reuters refuses to use the term "terrorist" because (as global news editor Steven Jukes states) "one man's terrorist is another's freedom fighter." But by continually using the term "uprising for statehood" to describe the terrorist wave, Reuters chooses to present them as freedom fighters. So much for journalistic neutrality.

Reuters regularly makes the effort to help readers "understand" the human side of Palestinian terrorists. When two Israelis were killed in Negohot, Reuters included this background information to help readers 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. (Sept. 26)

This description suggests preposterously that Palestinian terrorists perpetrate the willful murder of civilians out of their quest for peace.

REUTERS' HEADLINES

In July, HonestReporting released a study of one month of Reuters headlines on the conflict. Some findings:

▪ In violent acts by Israelis, "Israel" was named in 100% of the headlines, and the verb was in the active voice in 100% of the headlines, i.e.:

"Israeli Troops Shoot Dead Palestinian in W. Bank" (July 3)

▪ But in violent acts by Palestinians, the Palestinian perpetrator was named in just 33% of the headlines, and the verb was generally in the passive voice, i.e.:

"Bus Blows Up in Central Jerusalem" (June 11)

That is, in the world of Reuters headlines, when Israel acts, Israel is always perpetrating an active assault and the Palestinian victim is consistently identified. But when Palestinian terrorists act, the event just "happens" and Israeli victims are left faceless.

Moreover, Reuters presents Palestinian diplomats as pursuing peace, but frustrated by their obstinate Israeli counterparts:

"Palestinians Urge Israel to Free Prisoners" (July 4)
"Israel Sets Tough Terms for Prisoner Release" (July 6)
"Israel Fumes at U.S. Opening to Doves, Steps Up Raids" (Dec. 3)


The overwhelming message from Reuters headlines is tendentious indeed: Israel is the aggressor, and Palestinians are hapless victims.

* * *

Though maintaining that "the integrity, independence and freedom from bias of Reuters must be upheld at all times," Reuters' news reports indicate that the agency has clearly taken sides in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Ceasing to provide neutral information, Reuters has instead become a sort of world ambassador for Palestinian factions, operating via the ubiquitous Reuters news wire.

And for this, the Reuters "news service" deserves the Dishonest Reporting "Award" for 2003.

http://www.honestreporting.com/articles/critiques/2003_Dishonest_Reporting_-Award-.asp

bigross86
03 Jan 04,, 19:46
I agree.

Bill
05 Jan 04,, 05:27
One does not need rueters help in forming an anti-israeli opinion.

The Israeli gov't is more than enough to do that.

Praxus
05 Jan 04,, 05:37
You mean the part about them defending themselves or the part about trying to kill physcopaths.

But they do steel a lot of stuff and of course they did try and sink the USS Liberty for some reason(there was no logical reason to).

ChrisF202
05 Jan 04,, 21:33
Newsday (my local newspaper) and to a lesser extent, CNN are also biased

bigross86
05 Jan 04,, 21:40
One does not need rueters help in forming an anti-israeli opinion.

The point is they're blatantly lying right in the open about being unbiased when they're almost as bad as CNN

smilingassassin
13 Jan 04,, 04:57
"One does not need rueters help in forming an anti-israeli opinion.

The Israeli gov't is more than enough to do that."

I'm not surewhat you mean by that statement.....
Considering how arafat turned down the camp david accords and has never made a counter preposal for a solution to the palistinian problem I think he looks like a clown next to the Isreali govt. Saints they are not but they (unlike the palistinians ) want peace. If bush was faced with suicide bombers coming over the Canadian border I would expect some serious changes between our borders really quick.

Officer of Engineers
13 Jan 04,, 06:36
Originally posted by smilingassassin
"One does not need rueters help in forming an anti-israeli opinion.

The Israeli gov't is more than enough to do that."

I'm not surewhat you mean by that statement.....

It means that Tel Avi ain't smart enough to hire NY PR firms.

Leader
16 Jan 04,, 16:55
Improvement in Reuters terminology
Reuters, the recipient of the 2003 Dishonest Reporting 'Award', frequently misrepresents Hamas' ultimate aim of destroying Israel by using the following descriptive phrase:


The military wing of the Islamic militant group Hamas claimed responsibility for the attack in a statement faxed to Reuters. Hamas has spearheaded a 28-month-old Palestinian militant uprising against Israel for a state in Gaza and the West Bank.
(2.15.03 - emphasis added)

From this, the typical reader likely identifies with Hamas' 'freedom fight'. But Reuters coverage of yesterday's suicide bombing at the Erez checkpoint in Gaza showed noticeable improvement:


Sworn to Israel's destruction, Hamas has spearheaded a Palestinian uprising that erupted in the West Bank and Gaza in September 2000.

We've seen this change in terminology more than once from Reuters lately. It seems letters of protest, demanding accurate description of Hamas' goals, are working.

http://www.mediabackspin.com/