ODT buries bulldozer attack but criticises houses
July 24, 2008
The Otago Daily Times reached a new low by mentioning news of a Palestinian bulldozer attack that wounded 16 Israelis in two sentences deep within an article about Barack Obama's visit to Israel. In contracst, The Press (ChCh) devoted 120 column-cm to the incident, including a large photo, with the headline ‘Palestinian man rams bulldozer into vehicles’. Then a week later the ODT published a Reuters article (‘Rice begins fresh push for peace’, July 31) that led off with criticism of Israel for building houses in Jewish settlements. This occurred after the editor had refused KBRM's request for a second meeting (see July 10 post), saying ‘your points... have been noted... Appropriate discussions with staff have occurred... I see no need for another meeting.’ This led to a strong protest from the KBRM chairman:
Dear Mr. Kirkness,
Thank you for your response. I appreciate your efforts to make an improvement. However, just last week there was the most outrageous example of imbalance yet:
On July 24, a bulldozer attack that wounded 16 people was mentioned in two sentences buried deep in an article about Barak Obama's visit to Israel. It did not even appear in the "In Brief" column. By comparison, The Press (ChCh) devoted 570 sq cm (120 column-cm) to the news under the headline ‘Palestinian man rams bulldozer into vehicles’, with an accompanying photo. Also by comparison, a week earlier the ODT devoted 450 sq cm to articles about Israel building houses (‘Israel approves houses’, June 16, ‘Rice blames settlements’, June 17).
KBRM takes the issue of balance very seriously. When more emphasis is given to Israel's building houses than to Arabs who attack and kill Jews, there is something wrong, and when the imbalance is this extreme, something is badly wrong. Remember, this comes on top of the 12 examples of imbalance that I already pointed out, not to mention the fact that the ODT's 4-to-1 imbalance ratio for the year is one of the worst in NZ (see KBRM's ratings).
Remember, it is not just one little country that is involved here. Israel is the only Jewish state in the world, and when news media portray Israel as oppressing innocent neighbours, rather than as a country that wants peace with its neighbours but is forced to fight for its life, this can't help but nurture anti-Semitism. (I can give you direct evidence of this.) I'm sure that neither you nor I, nor any of the Jewish and non-Jewish members of KBRM, wants that to happen.
So when you say you have ‘noted’ the points we raised, and had ‘appropriate discussions’ with your staff, it's not clear what actions have been taken. When we met on June 13, you told me you would ‘be more careful in the future’, but look what's happened since.
The rules of the NZ Press Council require that a complaining organisation notify the publication in order to give an opportunity for the complaint to be resolved without recourse to the Press Council. Given all the above, I don't believe that your assurance of ‘appropriate discussions’ can be seen as resolving the complaints. Corrective or remedial action is needed. Perhaps an editorial apologising for past imbalance and making it clear that building houses is not much of a ‘threat to peace’ when compared with the insistence of Israel's neighbours on attacking and destroying it. Or perhaps pointing out that blockading a region (Gaza) that is trying to destroy you is among the least drastic and most appropriate actions a country can take, according to the UN charter.
I have no question that you and I are on the same side — that we both want to see balanced and accurate coverage in the news pages and oped pages. However I'm afraid that the problem is even worse now than it seemed at the time of our meeting.
Sincerely yours,
Rodney Brooks,
Chairman Kiwis for Balanced Reporting on the Mideast
P.S. Another example appeared just yesterday in the ODT, with a Reuters report that again criticised Israel's house-building without mentioning Arab attacks or the insistence of Hamas et al. on the destruction of Israel (also enclosed). One easy way for you to improve your balance would be to use AP instead of Reuters, which is blatantly pro-Palestinian in its reporting.