June 17, 2008
ODT fixates on Israel's house-building
Having blamed Israel for its ‘settlement policies’ in an editorial (see May 22 post), the Otago Daily Times went on to publish two news items (June 16 and 17) that were devoted to criticism of Israel for building houses in a Jewish section of Jerusalem. A response from KBRM was published on June 23:
The ODT ran two news items (16/6, 17/6) blaming Israel for building houses in a Jewish section of Jerusalem, calling it ‘a systematic policy to destroy the peace process’.
Yet these houses do not harm a single Palestinian nor do they damage any Palestinian's interests. They merely solidify Israel's already-announced intention to retain Jerusalem, having won it back (I use the word ‘back’ advisedly) after 19 years of Jordanian rule during which synagogues and other Jewish sites were desecrated.
Even Arabs in Arab sections of Jerusalem want to remain part of Israel rather than be transferred to a Palestinian state.
Where are the news reports about the daily rocket attacks on Israel which, unlike house building, actually kill and injure people? Readers could then decide on their own which damages the peace process more, building houses or killing people.
Rodney Brooks
The editor, however, appended a rebuttal that reflected a misunderstanding of the letter and further "demonised" Israel by the use of pejorative language:
There is no question of ‘blame’ — it was a statement of fact by the Israeli Government. The land in question is part of the West Bank seized by the Israeli army. The ODT did not ‘call’ the decision anything but merely reported the view of the Palestinian Government, which was echoed by the United States Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice.
KBRM protested and requested corrective action.
It seems there has been a major misunderstanding in regard to my letter that you published today. I thank you for publishing it, but by following it with a purported "correction", you made me look rather bad, even stupid.
Of course I know that the ODT didn't cast any blame, and of course I know that the two news items reported the views of others. I could have said ‘The ODT ran two news items that were mostly devoted to quotes and statements that blamed Israel for...’, but when you're limited to 150 words, every one counts. I think that my sentence ‘The ODT ran two news items blaming Israel for...’ says the same thing in a more compact way.
And of course I know that the decision to build houses was ‘a statement of fact by the Israeli government.’ Where did you get the idea that I questioned it?
A more serious matter is your statement that the West Bank was ‘seized by the Israeli army.’ The West Bank was indeed ‘seized’ by Jordan in 1948, but when Israel took it over in 1967 it was in a defensive war after being attacked (again) by Jordan. To call this ‘seizing’ is like saying that in 1944 France was ‘seized’ by the Allied Forces. This tendency to use pejorative language when Israel defends itself, as other nations are allowed (or even encouraged) to do, is precisely what KBRM is trying to fight.
Given all this, I ask you to publish the following letter to the editor, despite your usual one letter per fortnight rule. My personal integrity, and that of my organisation, are important to me.
I know that you don't ‘enter into discussions about selection’, but because of the special circumstances here, I ask you to please be so kind as to let me know your decision.
Thanks,
Rodney Brooks
Here is the submitted letter. As usual I worked hard to keep it within your 150 word guideline, but I can shorten it further if necessary.
My letter (June 23) did not accuse your paper of blaming Israel for building houses, as you implied. It was intended to rebut the ‘blame’ cast by those quoted in the news items you published — to show that these houses don't hurt anyone or damage anyone's interests, especially when compared to the rocket attacks that Israel has endured for years.
More serious is your statement that the West Bank was ‘seized by the Israeli army’. Israel captured the West Bank after being attacked once again by Jordan, which had truly ‘seized’ it in 1948. To call Israel's defensive action ‘seizing’ is like saying that in 1944 France was ‘seized’ by the Allied Forces.
The use of pejorative language to criticise Israel for defending itself, as other nations are permitted to do, violates journalistic standards of fairness, and is one of the things that www.kbrm.org.nz tries to fight.
The letter was not published