The death of Reuters

One can always tell when a creature is in its death throes.  It screams in agonizing rage, lashing out with its claws, snarling with its teeth bared; its body writhing up and down, left and right until... it collapses in exhaustion, its blood supply run dry, it's head a dead pulp.

That's where Reuters is today.  One can easily see this as the monster media company surrenders any last vestige of rational thought, respectable journalism, or integrity.

CAUTION: Extremely loud noise can be hazardous to your mental health

Reporting on remarks by Israeli President Shimon Peres published in the newspaper Yedioth Ahronoth, Reuters correspondent Allyn Fisher-Ilan characterizes NGOs, funded by foreign governments and dedicated to the destruction of Israel, as -- wait for it.... "dovish".

By contrast, the Yisrael Beiteinu party, which has introduced legislation similar to that existing in Germany, France and Belgium to ban public loudspeakers from being used to broadcast pre-dawn religious chants at levels that can reach 120-130 decibels, is labeled by Fisher-Ilan as "far-right".

Proving once again, that electronic amplification at high enough levels does indeed kill brain cells.

To an anarchist, one who defends his country is an "ultranationalist"

In an effort to smear Israelis whom they personally detest, Reuters correspondents routinely tag them with cheap labels they know carry a negative connotation for the audience: right-winger, settlers, ultranationalist, to cite a few.  On the Palestinian side of course, the corresponding identifiers have a somewhat different flavor: leftist, people, and refugee.

This name calling or stereotyping is a tired propaganda device and one which spits in the faces of Thomson Reuters executives who are bound to uphold, at all costs, the company's policy of impartiality embedded in the Trust Principles.

It is probably fitting however, that a Reuters correspondent who lists the anarchist group CODEPINK as a favorite on her social network site would use the term "ultranationalist" to describe someone who is not prepared to surrender his country to those who would wreck it:

(Reuters) - Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman said Sunday Israel should sever contacts with the Palestinian Authority over its plans to ask the United Nations in September to upgrade the Palestinians' status in the world body.
Citing calls by some Palestinian officials for protests to coincide with the U.N. session, Lieberman, an ultranationalist, told reporters: "What is clear is the Palestinian Authority plans violence and bloodshed of a type we have not yet seen."

 Carry on Allyn; carry on.

Jeffrey Heller forgets a little something

The Israeli parliament passed legislation today allowing parties to sue for financial damages when they are injured by boycott campaigns. In an eleven-paragraph story on the bill, Reuters Jerusalem Bureau Editor-in-Charge Jeffrey Heller devotes seven paragraphs to citing opponents of the bill, two paragraphs violating the Reuters Handbook by refusing to provide the dual names of politically disputed territory at the core of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict (Judea and Samaria/the West Bank), and one paragraph attempting to portray the Israeli government as extremist by employing a cheap political label.

What Heller fails to do in all eleven paragraphs, is report the truth. He tells readers:

Supporters of the bill said its reference to boycotts based on "geography" was aimed at countering calls in Israel and abroad for cultural and economic boycotts against settlements in the West Bank, occupied land Palestinians want for a state.

But the legislation has been written to protect not just those who are financially injured by boycotts aimed at settlements in Judea and Samaria (the "West Bank") but also those who are injured by boycotts aimed at Israelis in Israel.  Absent such legal protections, Israelis would have little recourse against those who seek to eradicate the Jewish state via Nazi-inspired economic and cultural boycotts.

Heller misses the point of these boycotts -- and wants his readers to miss the same point.

Jeffrey Heller, propagandist

What is the distinction between persuasion and propaganda?  We all use the former on a daily basis to influence and win others to our point of view.  There's obviously nothing unethical about that.  The propagandist however, goes one step further.  He uses specific rhetorical tricks -- lies, half-truths, omissions, emotionally-charged language -- to short circuit the critical faculties of his audience, to deceive and manipulate them into adopting his message.  That's unethical, particularly so when it's done by a professional journalist who commits to a policy of "integrity, independence and freedom from bias".

It's also what Reuters correspondents writing on the Middle East conflict do regularly.

Take this story by Reuters Jerusalem Editor-in-Charge Jeffrey Heller about today's upcoming speech before Congress by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.  Here are some of the rhetorical devices Heller uses to compel his readers to accept and adopt his (Heller's) anti-Israel, pro-Palestinian political plank:

"I will outline a vision for a secure Israeli-Palestinian peace," the right-wing Israeli leader said on Monday about his planned address to a joint meeting of Congress [...]

Heller characterizes Netanyahu as "right-wing", conjuring up images of a politician with extremist views.  Neither Heller nor anyone else at Reuters ever refer to Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas nor other Palestinian leaders as "right-wing".  Indeed, Abbas is routinely referred to as a "moderate".  This of a man who is on record as stating: “At this present juncture, I am opposed to armed struggle because we cannot succeed in it, but maybe in the future things will be different".

Obama drew Israeli anger a day earlier when he said a Palestinian state in the occupied West Bank and Gaza Strip should largely be drawn along lines that existed before the 1967 war in which Israel captured those areas and East Jerusalem [...]

The phrase "occupied West Bank" is used so often by Reuters, we refer to it as a propaganda mantra.  As we've noted many times, the territory described does not belong to any sovereign state and cannot therefore, under the Geneva Conventions, be considered "occupied".  Moreover, the appellation "West Bank" was assigned to the territory by the Jordanian Arabs following their invasion and conquest in 1948-49.  As such, it is an Arab ethnocentric name which celebrates the ethnic cleansing of the ancient Jewish community that had been living in the region.  The Judeo-Israeli appellation for the territory is Judea and Samaria, a name Reuters correspondents are enjoined to provide as per their handbook of ethical guidelines.  That propagandists like Heller consistently ignore their responsibility in this respect is evidence of their intent to deceive their audience.

Peace talks are frozen, largely over the issue of Israeli settlements in the West Bank. Neither Obama nor Netanyahu have offered a concrete plan to try to revive them [...]

Heller puts the onus for suspended peace talks solely on the US (Obama) and Israel (Netanyahu).  There is no suggestion whatsoever of the Palestinians offering "a concrete plan to try to revive them".  In fact, Heller gives Palestinian President Abbas a complete pass on the stalemate, failing even to mention that it is he (Abbas) who has repeatedly refused to sit down with Israel in negotiations.  

[US Congressman] Cantor was referring to a unity deal last month between Western-backed Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas' Fatah movement and Hamas, an Islamist group viewed by the United States as a terrorist organisation [...]

Hamas is not simply "viewed by the United States as a terrorist organisation".  It is also officially declared as such by nearly the entire free world including Canada and the European Union.  Heller is attempting here to downplay the widespread recognition of this reality.

Speculation had been high in Israel that Netanyahu would offer new ideas on peacemaking to try to display flexibility and rally opposition to the Palestinians' plan to ask the United Nations to recognise a Palestinian state in September.
In his AIPAC address, Netanyahu reiterated his demand that Palestinians recognise Israel as a Jewish state, a step they fear could impinge on their claim of a right of return for Palestinian refugees displaced by the Israeli-Arab conflict [...]

So you see, Netanyahu is inflexible and demanding, and the Palestinians fearful.

AIPAC's dominant voice in advocating for Israel has been challenged by J Street, a pro-Israel lobby founded in 2009.
J Street leaders have said the group provides a way for liberal American Jews critical of Israeli government policies to support the Jewish state.
Unlike AIPAC, the group supports President Obama's demand that Israel cease settlement expansion in the occupied West Bank, while calling on the Palestinians to end incitement and violence [...]

Here, Heller is lobbying for the lobby group J Street.  While Heller asserts, sans evidence, that J Street is "pro-Israel" and describes a few of its political positions, he pointedly fails to report on a key position of its leadership, that is, if the Palestinian Arabs and Arab states will not make peace with Israel, then perhaps Israel "ain't a very good idea".  This too, just a bit unlike AIPAC.

Reuters quotes Israel's PM and "far-right" FM on Iran's Suez crossing; censors Iran's response

Reuters Jerusalem Bureau Editor-in-Charge, Jeffrey Heller, reports on public remarks by Israel's Prime Minister and Foreign Minister with regard to Iran's plan to send ships through the Suez Canal:

(Reuters) - Iran's plan to send two naval ships through the Suez Canal to the Mediterranean is an attempt to expand its regional influence, and Israel takes a grave view of the move, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on Sunday.
"We can see what an unstable region we live in, an area in which Iran is trying to take advantage of the situation that has arisen and broaden its influence by transferring two warships via the Suez Canal," he said in public remarks to his cabinet.
"Israel takes a grave view of this Iranian step," Netanyahu said, adding the Jewish state would need to boost defense spending as a result of Tehran's move and recent regional upheaval. [...]

Last week, the prospect of the Suez crossing was described by Israel's far-right foreign minister, Avigdor Lieberman, as a provocation by Iran.

Heller is not as attentive however, to the official reply by Iran's "conservative" Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei:

"The fake Zionist government is a cancerous tumor and the cause of different diseases and political, economic calamity in the region," the commander-in-chief of Iran told officials while marking the anniversary of the birth of the Prophet Mohammed which in the Shiite calendar fell on Monday.

"The arrogance (Iran's standard term of abuse for the United States) is doing its best to preserve this warmongering tumor, but today the hatred of regional nations towards this cancerous tumor is more evident," state television quoted him as saying.

The above statement by Khamenei has gone completely unreported by Reuters.  Perhaps Editor-in-Chief David Schlesinger will look into the reasons why.

Rhetoric to bend the mind

At RMEW, we focus on the use of language by the propagandist (Reuters) to consciously and unethically coerce readers to adopt a point of view of the propagandist's choosing.  The specific rhetoric employed, the connotations associated with that rhetoric, and the reader emotions elicited typically reveal the propagandist's own view and agenda.

Take the following cursory biography of Israeli Defense Minister, Ehud Barak written by Crispian Balmer:

Factbox: Israel's Barak quits party, stays center-stage

(Reuters) - Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak has broken away from his center-left Labor Party and created a new parliamentary force which will almost certainly remain allied to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
His move follows months of squabbling within the once all-powerful Labor Party, with some senior members challenging his leadership and many supporters unhappy over his close ties with the right-wing Netanyahu.
Here are some facts about Barak.
* As Israel's prime minister from 1999 to 2001, Barak held peace talks with Syria that failed to reach a deal on the future of the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights. He made an unsuccessful attempt to achieve peace with the Palestinians after they began an uprising in 2000.
* Born in 1942 in an Israeli kibbutz, Barak served as a career soldier and rose through the ranks to become chief of the armed forces in 1991. He is Israel's most decorated soldier.
* Barak took part -- along with Netanyahu -- in the 1972 rescue by Israeli commandos of hostages on a [             ] hijacked Sabena airliner at Tel Aviv's international airport.
* Barak holds an undergraduate degree in physics and mathematics and a post-graduate degree in systems analysis from Stanford University in the United States.
* As defense minister in the government of Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, Barak was an architect of Israel's 2008/2009 offensive in the Hamas-ruled Gaza Strip.
* In the Netanyahu government, Barak has repeatedly insisted that the administration was serious about reaching a peace deal with the Palestinians. He is also believed to have been active in planning operations to combat Iran's nuclear program.  [emphasis ours]

First, note how Reuters seeks to establish an image of unbiased, authoritative reporting with the presumptuous "Factbox" format.  No subjectivity here, just unvarnished, unquestionable truth.

Whereas Balmer refers to Barak as breaking away from his "center-left" political party, the Israeli Prime Minister is characterized literally as an object of a more extreme political persuasion, "the right-wing Netanyahu".  Moreover, we have never seen Reuters use similarly hackneyed political tags to label Palestinian Arab leaders, other than "moderate".

In an effort to sanitize Palestinian violence, Balmer then refers to the Palestinian terror war, which lasted more than five years and cost thousands of lives on both sides, with the euphemistic and Arab-ethnocentric term "uprising".  This, a violation of the Reuters Handbook of Journalism which specifically proscribes against the use of such hollow and biased rhetoric.

By contrast, Balmer casts the Israeli military response to thousands of Palestinian rockets fired into Israeli civilian communities between 2002 and 2008 as an "offensive".  

In his discussion of Barak's participation in an Israeli rescue of a hijacked airliner, Balmer strategically omits mention of who, precisely, was responsible for the hijacking: the Palestinians.  Such a disclosure obviously would not reflect well on them.

And finally, Balmer violates the Reuters Handbook yet again, by employing the word "insisted" to invite reader skepticism as to whether the Israeli government is genuinely committed to a peace deal with the Palestinians.

Taken together, these rhetorical devices transform a story of less than 300 words into a powerful, yet nearly subliminal advocacy message on behalf of the Palestinians.

UPDATE 12:40 PM: Mendacious astrology freak, Allyn Fisher-Ilan regurgitates some of the same rhetoric in her "factbox".

It's a bird; it's a plane; it's Ultra-N Man!

Our desktop dictionary defines an ultranationalist as: one who has extreme devotion to or advocacy of the interests of a nation, especially regardless of the effect on any other nations.
  
This is how Reuters correspondents systematically characterize Israeli foreign minister, Avigdor Lieberman (when they are not referring to him as "fiery").  It is, of course, a form of name calling, a well-worn propaganda device intended to slap down a public figure with a cheap label and thus elicit a negative emotional reaction to that person from an unsuspecting audience.

Jerusalem Bureau Editor-in-Charge Jeffrey Heller continues the Reuters tradition in a story about Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's response to comments made by Lieberman regarding Israel's relations with Turkey and prospects for a peace deal with the Palestinian Arabs:

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, trying to keep his coalition intact before a vote this week on Israel's budget, has opted to play the diplomat in a flare-up with his fiery foreign minister, Avigdor Lieberman.
Commentators accused Netanyahu of kowtowing to the ultranationalist Lieberman at the expense of Israel's international image, but agreed a coalition crisis had been averted for now and predicted the budget would pass.
In blunt public remarks on Sunday, Lieberman said Israel would not apologize to Turkey over the killing of nine Turks by Israeli commandos during a raid on a Turkish ship trying to break a Gaza blockade in May.
Pouring scorn on the stalled peace process with the Palestinians, Lieberman told a meeting of Israeli diplomats a permanent peace agreement was impossible and the best option would be "Plan B," a long-term interim accord.
The comments seemed at odds with Netanyahu's stated desire to patch up relations with Turkey and U.S. efforts to keep alive a peace effort that has foundered on his refusal to extend a partial freeze on Jewish settlement building in the West Bank.

Note how Heller attempts to shift responsibility for his own editorializing with a reference to anonymous "commentators" allegedly doing the name calling, a violation of the Reuters Handbook of Journalism.  Heller then editorializes further, characterizing Lieberman's suggestion for an alternative interim accord with the Palestinians as "pouring scorn on the stalled peace process".  We've not seen Heller employ similar language to describe recent talk by Palestinian leaders of their "Plan B".

Heller blames Netanyahu, and by implication, Israel, for the failure of peace talks by pointing to the expired ten-month building moratorium for Jews in Judea and Samaria (the "West Bank") when it was Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas who filibustered on negotiations for over nine months and walked away entirely when the moratorium ended in September.

Only in the Orwellian realm of Reuters Jerusalem Bureau can Palestinians like Abbas, Saeb Erekat, and Nasser Al Kidwa, who demonstrate the most uncompromising positions on national rights, be caressed as political "moderates" and "pragmatists" while Israelis like Lieberman are blackened with the "ultranationalist" tag.

Reuters giblets

Apologies for the brief hiatus in our posting; we have been traveling for the holidays and working to complete an academic study.  In our absence, the world continues to spin, as does Reuters, and there is always a rich illustration on hand of the latter.

In a story on the Israeli parliament approving legislation to require a two-thirds majority for any surrender of annexed land to the Arabs (or short of that super majority, a public referendum on the matter), Reuters correspondent Allyn Fisher-Ilan fabricates Middle East geography, violates the Reuters Handbook of Journalism, sanitizes Palestinian intransigence, resorts to name-calling, and ignores international law:

Palestinians want East Jerusalem as capital of a future state in the West Bank, but Israel sees it as a part of its undivided capital, and it could prove difficult to win Israeli public backing to relinquish even parts of the holy city.

Palestinian leaders have also said they would seek to hold a referendum on any deal with Israel. Trying to get an agreement with the Jewish state approved by a majority in Hamas-ruled Gaza or the Palestinian diaspora may also prove difficult.

As we've noted numerous times, there is no city of "East Jerusalem".  The term was fabricated following the invasion, occupation, and ethnic cleansing of all Jews from the eastern part of Jerusalem by the Arab Legion in the 1947-48 Arab-Israeli War.  Each time Fisher-Ilan tags the area as such, she is peddling a fiction and implicitly endorsing that act of ethnic cleansing.  (Even the Palestinian Authority makes no mention of "East Jerusalem" on its official website and genuine news agencies like the Associated Press do not capitalize the "e" when writing about the eastern district of the city).

Moreover, by exclusively referring to the larger geographical area with the Arab-designated term, the "West Bank", Fisher-Ilan is violating her agency's handbook of ethical guidelines which stipulates that Reuters correspondents provide readers with the dual names of any disputed territory -- in this case, Judea and Samaria.

Fisher-Ilan seeks to downplay Palestinian opposition to peace with Israel with the risibly understated suggestion that, "trying to get an agreement with the Jewish state approved by a majority in Hamas-ruled Gaza or the Palestinian diaspora may also prove difficult".  Yes, we've noted Hamas' inflexibility.

For a radical left-winger like Fisher-Ilan, we can almost understand her mild characterization of the Israeli Labour party as "left-of-center" but her personal political views do not excuse heavy-handed editorializing in referring to Jews who oppose surrendering land to Arabs pledged to destruction of the state of Israel as "far-right".  The same Jews who have rights to the land not simply by "biblical birthright" as Fisher-Ilan scoffs, but as mandated by international law -- something Reuters routinely ignores.

Omissions and distortions

On Wednesday of this week, there was a non-violent demonstration by a small group of Israeli Jews in the predominantly Israeli Arab community of Umm El-Fahm to protest against the Islamist movement in the country led by cleric Raad Salah.  As we've noted many times, Reuters regularly distorts or withholds information from its readers which, while contextually vital to an understanding of the story, reflects poorly on the Palestinian Arabs.  Douglas Hamilton's piece on the demonstration in Umm El-Fahm and associated violence by local Arabs represents another such example of Reuters skewed reporting.

Hamilton refers to the Jewish marchers with the pejorative label "ultranationalist" while sanitizing Salah and his activities by writing merely that he was:

jailed by an Israeli court for disorderly conduct and assault after scuffles with police who confronted protesters during engineering work near at Jerusalem's al-Aqsa mosque, Islam's third holiest site in 2007.

There is no mention of Salah's extraordinarily vile history of incitement against Jews and the state of Israel.  In a sermon in 2007 for example, Salah told his Palestinian worshipers:

"They [the Jews] want to build their temple at a time when our blood is on their clothes, on their doorsteps, in their food and in their drinks. Our blood has passed from one 'general terrorist' to another 'general terrorist'... We are not those who ate bread dipped in children's blood."

Furnished with a more forthcoming account of the historical record, readers would have substantially greater insight into the rationale for the protest against Salah.

Hamilton also plays down Arab violence that accompanied the Jewish demonstration:

Israeli police on Wednesday fired tear gas and stun grenades to disperse Arabs who were protesting against a rally by ultranationalist Jews in an Israeli-Arab town. 

Riot police, some on horseback, charged about 200 Arabs who threw stones at them before retreating, police spokesman Micky Rosenfeld said. Ten masked Arabs were arrested.

Note how Hamilton obfuscates cause and effect, leading readers to believe that Israeli police initially assaulted Arab "protesters" who only then responded with stone-throwing.  This is not merely an inversion of reality, it is a willful perversion of the statement by Micky Rosenfeld who actually said:

“As soon as stones were thrown and policemen were attacked, officers responded, firing stun grenades and tear gas at the rioters. We can confirm that 10 masked suspects were arrested,” Rosenfeld said.

Along the way, Hamilton quotes Israeli Arab residents and MPs rationalizing Arab violence:

Ahmed Tibi, an Arab legislator in Israel's parliament, said the anger displayed by Umm el-Fahm residents was understandable. 

"The unified position of the people of Umm al-Fahm was to repel those (ultranationalists) and the reaction was a natural one to this incursion by the security forces," Tibi said.

While failing to mention that, as a reflection of Israeli democracy, the demonstration by the Jewish group was formally approved by the leftist High Court of Israel.

Reuters is dying

Reuters is dying.  Having succumbed to terminal jaundice, the 160-year-old media giant is naked, ashen, and flailing about in its death throes.  Any doubt about its condition or prognosis can be immediately put to rest with a hospital visit to correspondent Dan Williams:

Analysis: "Jewish state" demand complicates intricate equation

On the Middle East carousel of claims, recrimination and evasion, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's call on Palestinians to recognize Israel as a Jewish state could be seen as yet more spin.
Floated anew by the right-wing leader on Monday, this time as a condition for Israel extending a West Bank settlement freeze so that peace negotiations might resume, the demand was immediately rejected by Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas.
Abbas already accepts coexistence with Israel and should not be expected to endorse its internal constitution, his aides say; and Israel never set such terms for peace with Egypt and Jordan.
The fact Netanyahu, under U.S. pressure for a breakthrough, now seeks to win a core Palestinian concession in exchange for a bureaucratic gesture like another temporary curb on settlement housing starts has many Israeli pundits sharing the skepticism.
Critics accuse the prime minister of indulging in right-wing demagogy and say his move was a hapless attempt at trying to shift the blame for the talks stalemate onto the Palestinians by seeking something he knew the other side would never accept.

The emphasis is ours but really, we could have boldfaced nearly every word in the above diatribe to illustrate the sickness unto death that is Reuters today.

"A Jewish state demand complicates the equation".  But the demand for a "Palestinian Muslim state" does not?

"Netanyahu's call on Palestinians to recognize Israel as a Jewish state could be seen as spin".  But Abbas' demand for a Judenrein state is apparently straight as an arrow.

"Israel never set such terms for peace with Egypt and Jordan".  Perhaps that is because Egypt and Jordan never threatened to flood Israel with 6 million of their denizens.

"A core Palestinian concession in exchange for a bureaucratic gesture like another temporary curb on settlement housing starts".  As in a request that the Palestinian Arabs accept that which the international community formally resolved over six decades ago, a Jewish state, while the Jews accept an abrogation of their rights under international law.

And then there are those anonymous "pundits" and "critics" who apparently agree with Mr. Williams that the Israeli Prime Minister is engaged in "right-wing demagogy" and "hapless" blame-shifting.

Reuters, RIP. 

Deja Vu

In this piece of unsigned propaganda masquerading as "analysis", Reuters recycles its boilerplate tropes, canards, and outright lies which we have critiqued many times in the past so we'll just add emphasis and links to our original commentary:

(Reuters) - Hamas militants have shot dead four Israeli settlers in an attack that cast a shadow over Middle East negotiations convening in Washington on Wednesday.

The violence was condemned by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, who were due to dine with U.S. President Barack Obama ahead of face-to-face negotiations. Both leaders are struggling to contain hardliners opposed to a settlement.

Following are some of the possible implications of the attack.

JEWISH SETTLEMENTS

Netanyahu, on landing in Washington on Tuesday, quickly pledged a "no compromise" stance on Israeli security. He will now be even less likely to meet Palestinian demands to offer a further freeze in Jewish settlement-building in occupied land in the West Bank, where the attack took place.

Far-right cabinet ministers have told Netanyahu they will not back any extension of a settlement-building freeze that expires on September 26.

Within hours of Tuesday's attack, Jewish settlers were demanding Netanyahu call off the talks, and threatening to resume expanding their illegal enclaves in occupied territory as soon as Wednesday, in defiance of his partial freeze.

PALESTINIAN SECURITY CONTROL

Prime Minister Salam Fayyad swiftly vowed to take steps to try to prevent militants from striking again against Israelis, but may now face a more intense campaign by Hamas militants who had held their fire after a punishing war with Israel last year.

Etcetera, etcetera, etcetera ad nauseam.

Far out, man!

Name Calling is a propaganda technique intended to "create fear and arouse prejudice by using negative words (bad names) to create an unfavorable opinion or hatred against a group, beliefs, ideas or institutions [the propagandist] would have us denounce. This method calls for a conclusion without examining the evidence. Name Calling is used as a substitute for arguing the merits of an idea, belief, or proposal. It is often employed using sarcasm and ridicule in political cartoons and writing."

Immediately following his lede, note how Reuters correspondent Jeffrey Heller deploys this technique in an effort to disparage Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman and discredit in the minds of readers, anything Lieberman believes or is reported to have said:

"I think there's room to lower expectations and get real," Lieberman, a far-right member of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's cabinet, told Israel Radio.

According to Heller, Lieberman is "far-right" and obviously, that means his views are -- take your pick of ugly stereotyped allusion: extreme, radical, outrageous, hateful, vicious, fascist, racist, etc, etc, etc.

Heller doesn't label Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas in any similar fashion although Abbas:

1) wrote a doctoral thesis denying the Holocaust and claiming collaboration between Zionists and the Nazis,

2) is reported to have financed the Palestinian terrorist attack and murder of Israeli athletes at the Munich Olympics,

3) has refused, as per his obligations under the RoadMap, to end incitement against Israel and Jews,

4) has called for the continuation of armed violence against Israel until the Palestinians get everything they want.

Indeed, Reuters usually refers to Abbas in its stories as a "moderate".

A violation of the Reuters Handbook of Journalism and Trust Principles?  You betcha.

Reuters: Israeli "right-wingers" outnumber Israeli "left-wingers" 115 - 3

From April 2006 through March of 2009, the Israeli government was led by the Kadima party with Labour holding the second largest number of seats in the Israeli Knesset.  For the last nine months, the Likud party has been in power with Labour again, in the coalition.  Now, we don't know of any rational journalist who would consider politicians in the Labour party "right-wing" and very few would characterize the Kadima party as such.  Only politicians from Likud and other smaller parties like Yisrael Beiteinu are generally referred to this way in the media.  So let's be clear: Israel has been led by a "right-wing" party for just 9 of the last 44 months.  Moreover, leftist politicians, journalists, and powerful NGOs have remained a vocal minority in Israel during this time.

Now let's see how Reuters views things.  With article archives going back to early 2007, entering the term "Israeli right-winger" on the Reuters website search engine produces 115 results.  Entering "Israeli left-winger" yields 3.

We think those figures reveal much more about Reuters bias than they do about Israeli society.

Alistair Lyon tries his hand at the Reuters "FACTBOX" format

Reuters "Special Correspondent" Alistair Lyon, who gave us love for Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and enmity for Israel, seeks now to alert us to the uncertainties and potential dangers lurking in the Middle East for 2010.

Employing the risible Reuters "FACTBOX" format, Lyon suggests:

Prospects for progress toward peace look bleak, with a weak and divided Palestinian leadership, a hardline rightwing Israeli government and few signs of decisive United States involvement.

The use of pejorative name calling ("hardline rightwing") is a well-recognized propaganda technique intended to instill in the mind of the reader the scorn the writer holds for the subject.  By the same token, Lyon wants his audience to view the Palestinian leadership as "weak".  We wonder if Lyon noticed the Hamas rally on Monday:

True to form, Lyon then blames Israel for the risk of war with Hamas and Hezbollah:

Israel may have bought respite from direct attack from Hamas and Hezbollah with devastating assaults on the Gaza Strip nearly a year ago and Lebanon in 2006, but the risk of violence is high given Palestinian frustration and Israeli settler activity.

Ah yes, Palestinians are "frustrated" while Israeli setters are "active".  The risk of war couldn't possibly have anything to do with the Hamas Mission:

For our struggle against the Jews is extremely wide-ranging and grave, so much so that it will need all the loyal efforts we can wield, to be followed by further steps and reinforced by successive battalions from the multifarious Arab and Islamic world, until the enemies are defeated and Allah’s victory prevails.

Or the sentiments of Hezbollah's leader:

If [Jews] all gather in Israel, it will save us the trouble of going after them worldwide.

Or the 40,000+ rockets the group now has aimed at Israel in violation of UNSC resolution 1701.

Nah, all of this would be mere speculation as compared to Lyon's "facts".

Reuters' doors of perception

In a story appearing on their website today, Reuters characterizes Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, and Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman, respectively:

A moderate supported by the West, Abbas accused Washington of retreating from its demand for a freeze on Jewish settlements in the occupied West Bank before peace talks resume.

Israeli officials say Netanyahu wants to avoid interfering in Palestinian politics. But some commentators say the right-wing Israeli may be deliberately ignoring Abbas's threat, seeing it as just another bid to press Israel to halt settlement construction.

Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman, himself a settler heading an ultranationalist party, said he did not take Abbas's threat seriously.

Note the skewed political tagging of the three leaders and see our post just below about Mahmoud Abbas for a sense of Reuters' altered perception of reality.

Reuters publishes "FACTBOX" on Mahmoud Abbas; omits a few salient facts

When an individual, country, or event has been making recent news, Reuters will often publish what it headlines as a "FACTBOX" providing what it deems as important biographical and/or background info on the subject. With President Mahmoud Abbas threatening to quit his leadership role in the Palestinian Authority, Reuters seeks to enlighten us with "key facts" on Abbas' early life, political career, and accomplishments. We learn for example, that:

Also known by his nickname Abu Mazen, Abbas, 74, is a veteran of the Palestinian struggle for statehood.

The notion of Palestinian "struggle" has little to do of course, with the desire for statehood but is actually an Arab Muslim euphemism for the effort to exterminate the Jewish people:

Armed struggle is a strategy and not a tactic, and the Palestinian Arab People's armed revolution is a decisive factor in the liberation fight and in uprooting the Zionist existence, and this struggle will not cease unless the Zionist state is demolished and Palestine is completely liberated.

-- Fatah Constitution

Our struggle against the Jews is very great and very serious. It needs all sincere efforts. It is a step that inevitably should be followed by other steps. The Movement is but one squadron that should be supported by more and more squadrons from this vast Arab and Islamic world, until the enemy is vanquished and Allah's victory is realised.

-- Hamas Charter

And "nickname" in Reuters' parlance is a euphemism for a nom de guerre, which together with the effort to eradicate a Jewish national presence in the Middle East more accurately encapsulates Abbas' lifetime endeavors including:

1) writing a doctoral thesis denying the Holocaust and claiming collaboration between Zionists and the Nazis,
2) financing of the Palestinian terrorist attack and murder of Israeli athletes at the Munich Olympics,
3) refusing, as per his obligations under the RoadMap, to end incitement against Israel and Jews,
4) calling for the continuation of armed violence against Israel until the Palestinians get everything they want.

None of this very pertinent information is provided by Reuters in its sanitized bio of Abbas.

By contrast, here's how Reuters characterizes Israeli FM Avigdor Lieberman with the same "FACTBOX" format:

Israel's next foreign minister, Avigdor Lieberman, has rung alarm bells abroad with his policy toward Israel's Arab citizens

Lieberman, leader of the far-right Yisrael Beitenu party...

The Soviet-born ultranationalist...

He questions the loyalties of Israel's Arab citizens and his anti-Arab rhetoric has won a large following beyond his Russian-speaking base. He once suggested Egypt's Aswan Dam might be bombed and last year he said the president of Israel's Arab peace partner could "go to hell".

Note the scaremongering, negative stereotyping, and inclusion of misleading and out-of-context quotations which Reuters scrupulously avoids in its comparatively glowing portrait of Abbas.

We think Reuters ought to spend some time reflecting on the transparent bias in its biographical reporting and in the spirit of journalistic integrity, consider conforming to the rules and regulations spelled out in its own Handbook of Journalism.

The dream-weavers at Reuters

In an effort to affix blame to Israel for the years of horrendous bloodshed otherwise known as the Palestinian "intifada", Reuters' writers frequently assert that Palestinian violence occurred as a spontaneous response to Ariel Sharon's visit to the Temple Mount/al-Aqsa mosque compound in September of 2000. Douglas Hamilton today writes:

"He [Mohammad Dahlan] compared the week's events to violence that erupted after Israeli right-winger Ariel Sharon visited the site in 2000, triggering a Palestinian uprising against Israel."

Quite apart from the puerile reference to Sharon as a "right-winger", Hamilton is again misrepresenting the historical facts behind the cause of the intifada. Here's what PA Communications Minister, Imad Al-Faluji said in March 2001:

"The Al-Aqsa Intifada emphasizes these principles and axioms. Whoever thinks that the Intifada broke out because of the despised Sharon's visit to the Al-Aqsa Mosque, is wrong, even if this visit was the straw that broke the back of the Palestinian people. This Intifada was planned in advance, ever since President Arafat's return from the Camp David negotiations, where he turned the table upside down on President Clinton. [Arafat] remained steadfast and challenged [Clinton]. He rejected the American terms and he did it in the heart of the US."

A direct quote from an authoritative Palestinian source. Yet Reuters' writers persist in spinning a yarn at every opportunity. Irresponsible, unprofessional, and unethical journalism pure and simple. A clear violation of Reuters Trust Principles as well as the tenets of its Handbook of Journalism. Where is Dean Wright? Where is David Schlesinger?

For shame.

If it's the weekend, there must be a football match

Once again, Reuters writers resort to banal labeling of, natch, only Israeli leaders. In a report today which cites Egyptian President Mubarak urging Israel to enter into "final status" negotiations with the Palestinians, Reuters' Alastair Sharp writes:

"Netanyahu, a right-winger who took office in March, has made clear he does not wish to repeat any such offers that Olmert may have made."

No similar tagging (in fact, no political tagging at all) is attached to either Mubarak or PA President Mahmoud Abbas, both of whom are mentioned several times in the story. Yet, Abbas' status as a political reactionary is plain to see with his refusal to enter into peace negotiations with Israel failing an end to all building in the disputed territories (including the eastern portion of Jerusalem) and apparently, a new demand that:

"Israel must honor agreements on borders and Jerusalem that he [Abbas] says its previous government made in talks last year."

Oh my; intransigence and further demands from that political "moderate" Mahmoud Abbas.

In future, Reuters may wish to think about leveling the playing field in their match reporting.

For Reuters, only Israel plays football

In a story today on the disclosure and accompanying political fallout (no pun intended) associated with Iran's uranium enrichment plant near Qom, Reuters quotes reactions from a variety of prominent international figures. Here's a list of those mentioned:

US President Barack Obama, Iran's ambassador to the IAEA Ali Asghar Soltanieh, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Head of Iran's atomic energy organization Ali Akbar Salehi, Iran's Head of the office of Supreme Leader Mohammad Mohammadi-Golpayegani, Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, and the Foreign Minister of Israel Avigdor Lieberman.

Of all those cited, only one is characterized by Reuters in terms of his/her political leanings (as branded by Reuters of course). Can you guess which one? Here's a hint:

"The disagreement (on whether Iran is developing military nuclear capability) has been done away with," right-winger Avigdor Lieberman told Israel Radio."

By the way, we particularly like this quote from Mohammadi-Golpayegani:

"This new [nuclear] plant, God willing, will soon become operational and will make the enemies blind."

Perhaps Reuters should have tagged him as goalkeeper.