Tikun Olam-תיקון עולם: Make the World a Better Place

Pages

• Home
• Photo Gallery
• Advertising
• Comment Rules
• Subscribe to Posts (per post)
• Tikun Olam Store
• Donate
• Subscribe (daily digest)
• Contact
• About
• Monthly archives
• Terms of Use

7 Responses to “Israeli Journalism: Co-Opting Language in Service of Occupation”

1. paul malfara says:

   March 1, 2008 at 5:48 AM

   Richard,

   Excellent stuff, but these guys are amateurs compared with what goes on in the good ole’ USA. I’m sure you’ve seen Peace, Propaganda and the Promised Land, but for those readers who haven’t, take a look. The media watchdog groups like FAIR don’t just present the situation, they document it. The final paragraph of the above post could have come directly from the movie… “Palestinian violence, followed by Israeli retalaiation…forced to retaliate…stone-throwing youths forced Isreali troops in a Jewish neighborhood (near a settlement just outside of East Jerusalem) to respond with tear gas and rubber bullets”. Again and again, ad nauseum. Perhaps the biggest difference between the US and Israel in this respect is the fact that at least the Israelis understand the fact that there is an OCCUPATION. In the American Mainstream News Reporting, that little fact seems to be curiously omitted…

   PM

   Reply
2. americangoy says:

   March 1, 2008 at 6:52 PM

   This reminds me again of German reports on bandit activity in WW2.
   Would post a link but don’t want to spam.

   Anyway, the partisans fighting the occupying Germans are “bandits”, and the Germans have to retaliate and secure an area for the German Army or civilians… In the context of protecting the troops from “bandits”, all is fair and justified: wiping out a village, shooting women and children. After all, this is war, and we are just protecting the patriotic young boys in uniform from “bandits”…

   Reply
3. Iris Hefets says:

   March 2, 2008 at 5:35 AM

   well…I read Mendels analysis and agree with most of it. I totally disagree with his basic assumption though, that the Israeli journalists are usually open to discuss other issues but security ones. The example he gives in Kazav issue, is calling for reaction: it is a well known secret that the journalists also admitted. They all knew that Kazav had sexually harassed women all along his career. They decided to reveal and to publish it, when it was serving the elite interests. Kazav did not start this behavior as a President and had secretaries also as a maier and a minister of course. There are many issues like that, and the journalists are not “open minded professionals” that become Zionists when it comes to Security. If a theme has to do with the interests of the Ashkenazi hegemony in Israel, be almost sure you have to look for the information in the Internet , alternatively: what they tell you is what they want you to know. Mendel represent the good willing leftists in Israel, who have sympathy (and rightly so!) with the Palestinians, but do not see the other secondary victims of Zionism. As long as that goes on, there will be no change in Israeli internal policy. There are also Israelis of an Arab origin, who knows perfectly Arabic, where are they? they are used as MISTAARVIM, that means IDF uses their arab look to disguise themself and act as Palestinians, to recruits Quislings and so on. They could also be journalists and understand the Palestinians, but that is the last thing the Ashkenazu hegemony needs…cooperation between all Arabs (Muslim, Jewish, Christians…) will be their end.

   Reply
4. Richard Silverstein says:

   March 2, 2008 at 9:33 PM

   I would agree with Iris about the Katzav affair as his “reputation” was long known by journalists who protected it for some odd reason. It doesn’t speak well of Israeli journalism. I think they did better with the Haim Ramon matter.

   Reply
5. americangoy says:

   March 2, 2008 at 11:21 PM

   “They all knew that Kazav had sexually harassed women all along his career.”

   Interestingly, reading Ostrovsky’s book now and this gels well with his observations…

   Reply
6. Iris Hefets says:

   March 3, 2008 at 12:06 AM

   The Israeli journalists did indeed better with Ramon: they could be “liberal and professional” in his case and leave his protection to the Kneset members and other politicians. Ramon ist “unsere”, belongs to the Ashkenazi hegemony, that takes care: many big feminists (Ashkenazi as well) spoke for him – Shulamit Aloni and Shelly Yehimovitz among others. Ramon is in the government (can you imagine an American politician going back to the congress for example so fast after court found him guilty for sexual harassment?) and the liberals use him as a fig-leaf to cover their self castration. I would believe the Israeli press do their job, when they act against their own interests, i.e. showing some integrity.

   Reply
7. Richard Silverstein says:

   March 3, 2008 at 12:24 AM

   I found the idea that Ramon was welcomed back into the embrace of the cabinet & Knesset to be repulsive. You’re indeed correct that his career would’ve been over had he been in the U.S. Though he would’ve in all likelihood been hired as a lobbyist by some military contractor or high powered law firm.

   Reply