Bias in the ODT extends to letters

July 5, 2008

Following publication of the KBRM article ‘End to Gaza conflict in Arab hands’ (see June 30 post), the following letter appeared in the letters column of the Otago Daily Times. At 334 words, it is over twice the ODT guideline of 150 words.

I have read the article ‘End to Gaza conflict in Arab hands’ (ODT, 30.6.08) and it bothers me somewhat how people can twist and distort things to suit their own beliefs and prejudices.

Rodney Brooks and David Zwartz at one stage state that to end this conflict it is necessary for two nations to accept each other and Israel is ready to do that, which implies that the Palestinians are not. This is a complete nonsense because if the Israelis were serious then they would not be still building new settlements on disputed lands, which raises anger and is in violation of a United Nations ruling.

One point referred to was the Ireland conflict in which David Trimble stated that the British precondition of a cessation of violence and the decommissioning of arms was crucial to reaching a final agreement. While this is true, the authors forgot to mention that this was binding on both sides and the British also had to stop the violence and get British soldiers out of Ireland. This agreement went ahead with only a partial decommissioning on both sides.

Recently, Hamas and Israel agreed to a ceasefire and within 48 hours Israel decided to cross the border and murder an alleged Hamas militant and several innocent people going about their everyday lives, and then had the gall to scream foul when Hamas fired two rockets back into Israel. This is why there will never be peace.

Israel has systematically destroyed the complete economy of the Palestinian people by bulldozing massive areas and then stopping these people from working there. It has bombed any factory or industry that Israel decides may be a bomb-making facility.

The international players that leap to Israel's defence should open their eyes a bit wider to look at the whole picture and they will see that there is major fault on both sides. I hate to think of what will happen when certain parties get nuclear capability and just decide they cannot keep going backwards.

Bryan Hudson

Note that Mr. Hudson offered no evidence to support his accusation that the KBRM article was twisted and distorted. Instead he merely:

Gave his opinion that Israel is not serious about accepting a Palestinian state. (He is wrong.)
Stated that we didn't tell the whole story about Northern Ireland. (We had limited room and the whole story doesn't affect our analogy.)
Gave misinformation about an Israeli action (that we didn't mention) to try to show that Israel violated the truce.
Alleged that Israel has destroyed the Palestinian economy. (The Palestinian economy would be even worse without Israel.)
Claimed there is major fault on both sides. (We never said there wasn't.)

June 7, 2008

A second opposing letter of 210 words appeared in the letters column. The portion relevant to the KBRM article is as follows

...Mr. Prosser's claims of anti-Semitism in Pilger's work sat somewhat ironically across the page from an article attacking the Palestinian people. The unbalanced and inaccurate portrayal of the conflict between the state of Israel and the Palestinian people by Rodney Brooks and David Zwartz, was full of half truths with the direct result of placing the whole blame for the conflict in the Middle East squarely on the Palestinian people. This is untrue and only deepens the stereotypes of the uninformed.

The article was even more alarming in that Mr Brooks claims to be from a group called Kiwis for Balanced Reporting on the Mideast. This article was anything but balanced.

Their article and Mr Prosser's letter demonstrate that without understanding and a willingness to listen to all views, balance, empathy and progress will always be subservient to the ‘well he started it’ syndrome, and nothing will be resolved.

Paul Le Comte

June 10, 2008

Two countering letters by KBRM members were published. The first was shortened from 285 to 110 words by removing the "meat", leaving only the complimentary lead and closing paragraphs. It ended up like a love letter to the ODT. (Deletions shown in red):

For 60 years the state of Israel has existed on the Jewish people's ancestral lands and for 60 years Israeli governments have sought to live peaceably with their Arab neighbours, with varying degrees of success. The Israeli people have lived through invasions, defensive and pre-emptive wars and on-going terrorist attacks. They have lived with discrimination from the United Nations, their Arab neighbours' refusal to recognise their right to exist and a growing international chorus of anti-Semitic hatred. Israel's leaders have attended accords, signed treaties, shaken hands with sworn enemies, handed over land and offered still more land in exchange for peace. They finally built a wall and installed checkpoints to protect themselves from people who train their children to hate and kill Jews.

Yet still the rockets fall; terrorists still kill Israeli civilians; Hamas, Hizbollah, and Iran call for the destruction of Israel; the Arab media put the entire blame for the ‘middle East conflict’ on the tiny state of Israel, and the western media unquestioningly believe and publish distortions and half truths against Israel.

Unless we are able hear stories from both sides of the conflict, we will never be able to get beyond our own (and the media's) prejudices and beliefs about Israel and the Palestinian people. Thank you Otago Daily Times for letting an alternative voice be heard.,

Kirsty Walker

The second letter was shortened (emasculated?) from 273 words to 100. (Deletions shown in red).

Letter writer Bryan Hudson does not allow facts to intrude in his comments about the Israel/Arab conflict. Israeli forces did kill a Hamas terrorist — near Nablus , on the West Bank , an area not covered by the Truce. There are no Israeli settlements in Gaza or Lebanon. Despite this 6000 + missiles and mortars have been fired from Gaza that have killed and maimed women and children living well within Israel's borders, as well as the kidnapping and killing of Israeli soldiers inside Israel by Hezbollah who occupy part of Lebanon.

His comments re Palestinian industry and employment are factually incorrect - there is, despite the conflict, considerable trade to Israel from the PA territories — examples include building materials, fruit and vegetables and labour. How do I know? Because I am having my kitchen renovated in Jerusalem and many of the building products are sourced from the PA as well the builders contracted to do the work. And when I visit Hadassah Hospital , a major Jerusalem hospital and a centre of excellence in the Middle East many staff (including consultants and senior nurses) travel from the West Bank every day.Similarly countless patients from Gaza and the West Bank receive treatment for major medical conditions at Hadassah.

The conflict in Ireland was resolved for a number of reasons, one fundamental reason being that IRA funding from the US completely stopped. Perhaps if Iran, Syria ,Saudi Arabia and others ceased their generous funding of terrorism a resolution to the problem might be more easily seen. Bryan Hudson must be allowed his ignorance but your readers deserve better.

Peter Bolot

A third letter of 145 words was not printed, but was acknowledged as ‘a similar letter’. In fact, its points are completely different, as you can see:

Bryan Hudson says the Israelis don't want to negotiate peace because they are still building settlements. We all know that concessions are made during negotiations, not before. Sadly Hamas steadfastly refuses to negotiate. Should this ever change, settlements would be discussed alongside other issues.

In N. Ireland there was no British Army withdrawal before negotiations (they were simply confined to barracks) and they still are present in N.Ireland. However it is revealing that Hudson accepts the parallels between the Israelis and British Army on one hand and Hamas and the IRA on the other.

Mr Hudson ‘Hates to think what will happen when certain parties get a nuclear capability,’ — raising an interesting point about the Arabs' philosophy on use of nuclear weapons. Israel has possessed nuclear weapons for decades. Thankfully like other civilised nations they behave responsibly. Would Iran or Hamas exercise such self-restraint?

Richard Noar

July 16, 2008

The KBRM chairman submitted a letter on July 9 that deliberately used "telegraphic style" to stay within 150 words. It was accompanied by a cover letter requesting that it be published intact:

Dear Editor,

After the two letters, totalling 544 words, that attacked my (and David Zwartz's) article, I hope you'll allow me to respond. However I'm afraid to ask for extra space, so I tried to keep my response to 150 words. It wasn't easy, but I succeeded (not counting the bullets). The result is a somewhat unusual letter, but I ask you to publish it as is (or else allow me more words). I know you don't acknowledge letters, but in this case will you please tell me your decision...

The request was not honoured, nor was any notification given. Instead the letter appeared a week later with deletions (shown in red) and other minor changes in wording.

Can I answer two letters (544 words) attacking article about Israel (30.6.08) in 150 words? I'll try.

To Bryan Hudson (5.7.08):

No ‘twisting or distorting’. Every word was true.
Israel is willing to accept Palestinian state, house-building in Jewish areas notwithstanding.
You're right. Irish analogy not complete, but point valid: Abandon aggression first.
Your facts are wrong about Israel's ‘truce violation’. Attack was in West Bank not Gaza; target was armed Jihad terrorist, not ‘alleged Hamas militant’. No truce violation.
Israel's cited actions are for protection, not to destroy Palestinian economy. They work. Stop attacks — Palestinian economy better.
Anyone who equates house-building with rocket attacks badly needs moral compass.

To Paul Le Comte (7.7.08):

KBRM seeks accuracy and balance. We submit articles when they are missing.
KBRM doesn't ‘attack Palestinians’ KBRM sympathises with Palestinian plight.
Question is''t ‘who started it’; question is ‘how to end it’.

See www.kbrm.org.nz for evidence.

Rodney Brooks,
Chairman Kiwis for Balanced Reporting on the Mideast

Conclusion: Even in the letters column, the ODT uses different standards for letters that attack Israel and letters that defend Israel.