Through selective reporting, maliciously misframing events and deviously giving disproportionate attention to select viewpoints, the media impacts public understanding and opinion.
By Allan Wolman
Media manipulation is not just a tool for attracting audiences; it is also frequently employed to promote specific editorial agendas and propagate particular viewpoints. This manipulation can be seen in the way some news outlets, like Al Jazeera, are perceived to politicize their content, often aligning with one side of a conflict or issue rather than maintaining impartiality.
For instance, Al Jazeera has been accused of bias in its coverage of Middle Eastern politics. This partisanship can shape public opinion and influence political discourse, both regionally and globally. By highlighting particular narratives, omitting counterarguments, or emphasizing certain events over others, media outlets can steer the public's perception to align with their own ideological leanings or those of their stakeholders.
Inflaming instead of Reporting. Since the outbreak of the war on October 7, Al Jazeera switched to non-stop live coverage of what it calls "the Israeli aggression on Gaza," even though it was Hamas that started the carnage by brutally massacring over 1,200 Israelis and kidnapping hundreds.
Such practices are not unique to Al Jazeera; many media organizations around the world have been accused of similar biases. Whether through selective reporting, framing stories in a particular light, or giving disproportionate attention to certain viewpoints, media manipulation can significantly affect public understanding and opinions. This underscores the importance of critical media consumption and the need for audiences to seek diverse sources of information to gain a more balanced perspective on global events.
The subtle use of language in media plays a crucial role in shaping public perception while maintaining an appearance of objectivity. This technique involves carefully selecting words and phrases that carry implicit connotations, which can influence how the audience interprets the information.
The choice between terms like "freedom fighters" and "terrorists" to describe a group involved in conflict can dramatically alter the audience's perception of that group. Such linguistic choices are strategic, designed to project a particular meaning without overtly revealing the media outlet's bias.
In the immediate aftermath of the dramatic rescue of four Israeli hostages from captivity in Gaza, Sky, CNN, together with other networks referred to the 'release' of the hostages. This subtle play on language misrepresents the situation. The hostages were not released from captivity but were 'rescued' in a daring and meticulously planned operation by the IDF.
BBC Bias. In a June 9,2024 interview, BBC's news anchor, Helena Humphrey (left), asks former IDF spokesman Jonathan Conricus (right) why Israel didn't warn Gazans before the rescue operation, leading Conricus to wonder "whether she was reading off a teleprompter or actually thought of the question herself."
During a bizarre interview between BBC news anchor, Helena Humphrey and former IDF spokesman, Jonathan Conricus, Humphrey (with her mind fixated on Hamas's claim that civilians were killed during the rescue raid that freed the hostages), astoundingly asked:
"Would there have been a warning to those civilians for them to get out on time?"
In framing this question, Humphrey deliberately ignored that the hostages were imprisoned within civilian homes.
The implication here is that the BBC expects - or even demands - that Israeli security forces should inform the enemy in advance of an imminent rescue operation, which would inevitably compromise the mission and potentially endanger the lives of the hostages!
Not only language, but numbers play crucial roles in media manipulation. The United Nations, which is openly critical and hostile towards Israel, recently revised its previous estimates based on information from the Hamas-run Gaza Ministry of Health.
Recent data published by the UN indicates a significant revision in the estimated number of women and children killed during the conflict in Gaza. In reports released on May 6 and 8, the UN seemingly halved its previous estimates. According to Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), the revised reports show a decrease of almost 47% in the total number of women and children killed during the war. Additionally, the data now indicates that men aged 19-59 made up 40% of the fatalities, contradicting previous claims that 70% were women and children. Notably, there is no mention of Hamas fighters included in the casualties, and important to note that child soldiers are not only found in West Africa; they are found in other conflict zones, including Gaza.
Flawed Figures. While the casualty figures issued by the Hamas-run Gaza Health Ministry are known not only to be unreliable and deliberately false, the global media nevertheless quote them thus deliberately tarnishing Israel's reputation.
The Washington Institute for Near East Policy released a report in January highlighting major discrepancies in the fatality reports, suggesting potential manipulation. This raises important questions about the reliability of information coming from conflict zones and the methods used to gather and report such data. Despite UN and other reliable sources, the mainstream media continue to quote casualty figures provided by the Hamas Health Authority – a highly questionable information source that they well know but nevertheless quote, deliberately spreading lies to discredit Israel, an age-old practice of antisemitism.
The rapid release of casualty numbers by Hamas authorities, raises questions about their accuracy and reliability. Shortly after the hostage rescue, CNN reported that at least 236 people had been killed and more than 400 injured, "according to hospital officials in Gaza." The Associated Press published that 210 Palestinians, including children, were killed, "according to a Gaza health official." It is puzzling how these numbers were gathered within mere hours and how distinctions between men, women, and children were reported with such precision!
At the same time European Union High Representative, Josep Borrell described the hostage operation carried out by Israeli security forces on Saturday morning (8 June) as "appalling". Borrell referred to the operation as "another massacre of civilians," noting that the EU "condemns this in the strongest terms." This rapid condemnation and the reported casualty figures must surely raise questions.
Man with a Fixation. While antisemitism surging across Europe and Ukraine facing collapse under Putin's aggression, EU foreign policy chief Josep Borrell appears far more focused on one issue – undermining Israel.
SUSPECT SOURSES
Reports from Israel reflect a vastly different casualty count from the rescue operation. This discrepancy exposes the dubious nature of the sources of information presented by different parties involved – a reflection of political agendas, prejudice and naked bias.
So, will the EU's top diplomat Josep Borrel consider the credibility, context, and potential biases of the reports coming from Hamas authorities given previous discrepancies highlighted by the recent UN report?
Given the Spaniard's transparent bias against Israel and the Jewish people - remember his diabolical accusation that Israel "uses hunger as a weapon of war" - don't hold your breath.
About the writer:
Allan Wolman in 1967 joined 1200 young South Africans to volunteer to work on agricultural settlements in Israel during the Six Day War. After spending a year in Israel, he returned to South Africa where he met and married Jocelyn Lipschitz and would run one of the oldest travel agencies in Johannesburg – Rosebank Travel. He would also literally 'run' three times in the "Comrades", one of the most grueling marathons in the world as well as participate in the "Argus" (Cape Town's famed international annual cycling race) an impressive eight times. Allan and Jocelyn immigrated to Israel in 2019.
While the mission of Lay of the Land (LotL) is to provide a wide and diverse perspective of affairs in Israel, the Middle East and the Jewish world, the opinions, beliefs and viewpoints expressed by its various writers are not necessarily ones of the owners and management of LOTL but of the writers themselves. LotL endeavours to the best of its ability to credit the use of all known photographs to the photographer and/or owner of such photographs (0&EO).
No comments:
Post a Comment