Israel's Invasion Inspires One-Sided Commentary in U.S. Media

Israel launched its much-anticipated invasion of Gaza on Saturday. For over a week, U.S. media had provided largely one-sided coverage of the conflict, with little editorializing or commentary arguing against broader Israeli actions.

Most notably, after more than eight days of Israeli bombing and Hamas rocket launching in Gaza, most notably, The New York Times had produced exactly one editorial, not a single commentary by any of its columnists, and only two op-eds (one of them already published elsewhere). The editorial, several days ago, did argue against the wisdom of a ground invasion - - but even though that invasion had become ever more likely all week the paper did not return to this subject.

Amazingly, the paper has kept that silence going in Sunday's and even Monday's paper, with no editorial or columnist comment on the Israeli invasion -- beyond a hawkish pro-invasion contribution by William Kristol. It's as if the Times is waiting for the invasion to be over and adapt its position to the outocme.

The Washington Post did manage to work up an editorial for Sunday which, in the usual contortionist manner, found the invasion "justified" but also highly "risky."

The invasion, to no one's surprise, did begin on Saturday -- so any further criticism will now come too late. As in the past, U.S. media coverage and commentary has overwhelmingly backed the Israeli actions (as it did in the Lebanon war in 2006, which turned into a fiasco).

CNN and MSNBC have provided some helpful balance, starting late Saturday, but on the Sunday morning talk shows Democratic leaders said little, or nothing, critical of Israel.

Of course, most on-the-scene coverage of civilian casualties in Gaza has been hindered, to say the least, by Israel barring foreign journalists from entering.

On Friday, Amnesty International condemned the U.S. response to the "disproportionate" Israeli bombing of Gaza -- with largely U.S. weapons. Some of it amounts to U.S.-backed "human rights abuses," it charged.

The group recalled that the U.S. supplied most of the millions of cluster bomblets dropped by Israel in the Lebanon war in 2006.

"Amnesty International USA is particularly dismayed at the lopsided response by the U.S. government to the recent violence and its lackadaisical efforts to ameliorate the humanitarian crisis in Gaza," the group told Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice in the letter, which was released to the media.

Ethan Bronner, in a NYT news report, observed,

"The scope of the assault, and the days of buildup at the border, hint at an unstated but profound question: can the rockets really be stopped for any length of time while Hamas remains in power in Gaza? And if the answer is determined to be no, then is the real aim of the operation to remove Hamas entirely, no matter the cost?"

Meanwhile, a columnist for the Spectator in London argued for the arrest of Western journalists who have criticized Israel's actions. Israel starting adding artillery fire to the bombing, even before the invasion. One nighttime airstrike hit the offices of the Hamas weekly newspaper Al Resala in Gaza City, wounding 16 civilians who live nearby, Hamas and residents said.

And Amir Oren, in a column at Haaretz, concluded with a call to get done with Gaza:

"[T]he IDF must move quickly to disengage, in order to free its attention for the paramount task of preparing a military blow to Iran, if diplomacy and deterrence fail. As long as the great threat of Iranian power is hovering, the smaller threats of Hezbollah and Hamas that derive from it will not be dispelled."

Israel, meanwhile, maintained its ban on foreign journalists entering the Gaza Strip Friday despite a recent Supreme Court order to allow a limited number of reporters to enter the territory.

UPDATE: The Jerusalem daily Haaretz has just put up an editorial critical of Israel's actions -- and the boosterism of President Bush. Excerpt:

The need to present an achievement has compelled the civilian leadership to add a ground campaign to the aerial onslaught.... Those who back the operation are already imagining Hamas collapsing, its leadership fleeing or killed, and house-to-house searches for weapons to be destroyed. After the operation, Gaza would be returned to Palestinian Authority control, purged of terrorism -- the Lebanon dream realized in Gaza. This is what these people believe.

It would be best to cut this dream short before it turns into a dragged-out nightmare, and to limit the ground operation to more modest goals.

And Gideon Levy writes in a column at Haaretz:

Everything is permitted, legitimate and just. The moral voice of restraint, if it ever existed, has been left behind....Nobody is coming to the rescue -- of Gaza or even of the remnants of humanity and Israeli democracy. The statesmen, the jurists, the poets, the authors, academe, and the news media -- pitch black over the abyss.

Finally, from a NYT report late Sunday from Shifa Hospital in Gaza City:

The scene on Sunday at the hospital, a singular and grisly reflection of the violence around it, was both harrowing and puzzling. A week ago, when Israel began its air assault, hundreds of Hamas militants were taken to the hospital. Yet on Sunday, the day Israeli troops flooded Gaza and ground battles with Hamas began, there appeared not to be a single one.

"The casualties at Shifa on Sunday -- 18 dead, hospital officials said, among a reported 30 around Gaza -- were women, children and men who had been with children. One surgeon said that he had performed five amputations.'I don't know what kind of weapons Israel is using,' said a nurse, Ziad Abd al Jawwad, 41, who had been working 24 hours without a break. 'There is so much amputation. It's so hard when you do it to women,' he said, adding grimly that even the devastating 1967 war here was over in six days.'

Greg Mitchell is editor of Editor & Publisher. His recent book on Iraq and the media is "So Wrong for So Long."

Comments

[steamboat]

Why only mention the NY Times is quiet. So are all democrats and republicans. So is Pres.-elec­t Obama.....­Why only pick on the NY Times?

[BigPictures]

Many world's problem requires a more effective world government, the United Nations. According to the UN resolution, if the Arabs renouce violence, Israel is obligated to return the Arabs land. Hamas should voice their complaints about Israel peacefully. For a weaker power, the path to its people's dignity is through non-violence principle of Ghandi and Martin Luther King. Israel should consult the UN regardiing how to deal with the Hamas' rocket attacks. The Abrabs Peace Initiative based on the UN resolution is a good principle for permanent Middle East peace. If Obama really wants to break away from Bush's policy and become a true leader of the world, he should find ways to strengthen the UN. One problem with the UN is it is not democratic, so a better UN would be more democratic. Many work needs to be done in international law. Until powerful nations decide to adhere internation laws, there will be no peace on earth. For example, the veto power of the UN security councile present a conflict of interests, which should be abondonded in order to be more democratic.

[politricking]

Because in this case he's talking about the media specifically although I sympathize with your indignation overall on the matter.

[TerrapinCB]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/daniel-levy/what-next-on-gazaisrael-a_b_153743.html

(1) Never forget the basics - the core issue is still an unresolved conflict about ending an occupation and establishing an independent Palestinian state - everything has to start from here to be serious (this is true also for Hamas who continue to heavily hint that they will accept the 1967 borders).

(2) Israeli disengagement from Gaza of summer 2005. Gaza was closed off to the world, the West Bank remained under occupation and what had the potential to be a constructive move towards peace became a source of new tensions - something many of us pointed out at the time (supporting withdrawal from Gaza, opposing how it was done).

(3) Hamas participated in and won democratic elections to the Palestinian Legislative Council in January 2006. U.S.-led international response was to hermetically seal-off Hamas, besiege Gaza, work to undemocratically overthrow the Hamas government and thereby allow Hamas to credibly claim that a hypocritical standard was being applied to the American democracy agenda.

[MarvBitesBack]

The notion of "proportionality" is a red herring. Israel's objective is to stop the rocket attacks, not to do bookkeeping on the casualties as they attempt to stop them.

[Michale32086]

Well said...

People need to look at the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court and the definition of "proportio­nate"..

But why confuse them with facts when they got such a good hysteria roll going...

Michale...­..

[wdw505]

a proportional response is what is happening right now.......­..laughing

[politricking]

Israel uttering the words Peace from its lips is a red herring.
Israel does not want peace.

"Bookkeeping on the casualties" - I didn't know Dick Cheney posted here.

[alumcreek]

I have 2 comments:
1. How does one calculate a proptional response to daily missile bombardment? I wish to see the formula that is considered acceptable for use in such an instance. Surely it must be published in some textbook or other?

2. In 1962 Cuba began the process of obtaining and installing missiles that would threaten the USA. What was the USA's response to such actions? Had the Cubans managed to fire off even one of those missiles what would have been the proportional US response? Would the USA have sat down and begged the Cubans to cease and desist? Would Cuba be populated by any humans today had it fire off even a single missile?

[Alvin4NY]

No one bothered to answer your question..­...hmmmmmm­.......I thought it begged a response.

[wdw505]

i can solve it all.......­..shoot a rocket....­..get an hour of bombing...­.......sho­ot another add an hour......­.repeat as rockets request more time......­......prob­lem solved....­.....bomb into submission

[Spinzone]

People like Frank Rich and all others at the NYT are just too busy writing about how dumb Bush is for the 1000th time. They have no time for analysis and discussion of events that impact the world. Whoops, I forgot, there are a couple of people at the NYT who are involved in asking the government for a handout for their failing newspaper.

[chaos4700]

Yes, and it's a joke because they should have been writing about Bush failures five or six years ago when they were first becoming apparent. This is why people are increasingly turning away from mass media as a news source -- not only is it untrustworthy, it's useless to everyone.

[Akin]

Yeah, the left never fails...

[Michale32086]

The one overriding facts are these...

Israel is prosecuting this war in accordance with the Geneva Conventions, the International Criminal Court and the rules of warfare.

HAMAS is committing terrorism.­..

That means that Israel has the legal, ethical and moral high ground.

It's that simple...

Michale...­..

[Spinzone]

Just like Russia in Georgia.

[chaos4700]

Say that again when they haul Olmert, Barak and Livni up to Hague for war crimes. In the meantime, we'll pay more attention to the law scholars and statesmen on this one, not ex-military recruitment tools.

[Michale32086]

Yea, yea, yea...

How long have ya'all been saying that Bush is going to end up at the Hague as well...

Face it, you have absolutely NO legal argument that hasn't already totally devastated­..

Michale...­..

[hortonhearsawho2]

" Finally " as in what took so long ?

[samer23]

“I am sorry gentlemen, but I have to answer to hundreds of thousands who are anxious for the success of Zio.nism. I do not have hundreds of thousands of Arabs among my constituen­ts.” President Harry Truman, quoted in “Anti Zio.nism”, ed. by Teikener, Abed-Rabbo & Mezvinsky.

[chaos4700]

I don't want to trash talk Harry Truman too much, but setting a precedent that the American political discourse is supposed to sacrifice the principles of fair play, justice and international diplomacy just to cater to a minority faction voting block back home is not something history should be kind to him about.

[InofTouch]

I laugh, I want commentary with my war...like a DVD cause that what I'm hearing in this artical

[3dogman]

So if you're not from Israel or Gaza and you really wanted to form an honest opinion about what is really going on in Gaza where would your go? I try to read both sides here on the Post, I follow a lot of the links, but there is too much partisanship on both sides. Each side refutes the other leaving no clear answer.

[bermanator]

Honestly, I would start on wikipedia and read their summary of the history of the conflict. They provide an excellent, fact-based history of events with the necessary footnotes should you find a piece of information of interest or think it could be wrong. You should draw your own conclusions from what you read on wiki rather than listen to any of the hysteria here in the comments section.

I could give you my own links, but people here would immediately try to discredit them.

[chaos4700]

LOL! Yeah right. Everyone uses wikipedia for the reasons you document. I use it all the time in my comments, for exactly the same reasons. And unlike you, I'm not afraid to provide links.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamas#Funding
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_exodus
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_David_Hotel_Bombing
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ariel_sharon#Sabra_and_Shatila_massacre
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eitan_Livni (Tzipi Livni's father -- considering the children of Hamas leaders are now culpable for their parent's crimes in the eyes of Israel, I think the same rule could applies to Israeli leaders)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irgun

[Beowoof]

It's easier for the media to feign outrage when a Governor or Senator are caught in some kind of scandal. They really don't want to touch this one in similar way they stood by with the war in Iraq.

[texasrodeoqueen]

Bush wagging the dog - As of Jan 1, 2009 he is in Iraq unauthorized by the Congress and Constitution of the United States of America.

[MagisterLudi]

Blogger states:"..­..After Days of New York Times Silence."

That a skewed perception largely based on antipathy toward NY TImes' stance.

And now ( drum roll) REALITY:

Editorial War Over Gaza
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/31/opinion/31grossman.html?ref=opinion

p-Ed Contributor David Grossman
Fight Fire With a Cease-Fire
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/31/opinion/31grossman.html?ref=opinion

Op-Ed Contributor BENNY MORRIS
Published: December 29, 2008
Why Israel Feels Threatened
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/30/opinion/30morris.html?ref=opinion

News Analysis "Clinton, Familiar With Pitfalls of Mideast Politics, May Face Early Test in Gaza
By MARK LANDLER published: January 2, 2009

News Analysis:Is the Real Target Hamas Rule?
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/04/world/middleeast/04assess.html

In a Broadening Offensive, Israel Steps Up Diplomacy
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/02/world/middleeast/02mideast.html

The New Meaning of an Old Battle
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/04/weekinreview/04myers.html

Text: Statement From Israel’s Defense Minister
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/04/world/middleeast/04cnd-mtext.html

Egypt Pressed on Gaza From Without and Within
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/03/world/middleeast/03egypt.html?ref=world

[SiberianRat]

I've read some of those (before this blog post) and they reaffirmed my POV that NYT has become a rag that is no longer worth destroying trees for.

[MagisterLudi]

Well, I am sure the elites of the world will stop reading NYT because they don't support Hamas. Genius comment.

[Billie]

All you have to do is watch the movie Broadcast News (from 1987 and aired this evening) to understand the modern corporate American media's estrangement from truth and ethics. There was no balanced coverage, of course.

[larry278]

Mr Mitchell,
Amir O of HAARETZ has been very busy. Did you see his article about the change of attitude of IDF's ground forces? IDF Gen's are speaking with 1 voice to the media. That is a change from the invasion of Lebanon. As I recall, every IDF ground forces spoke to the media with each Gen's own private spin, multiple Gen's, multiple voices from IDF ground forces. The NYT may have expected multiple voices again & missed seeing that the IDF was & is serious about invading the Gaza Strip. FYI, I'm speaking of Amir O's article from HAARATZ which CLG NEWS has printed.
Israel & IDF, among others, have found a way to fool the NYT. JTA, JERUSALEM POST & more moderate Jewish &/or Israeli voices may get around to telling us more when & if the story won't put IDF ground troops in danger.
As for the NYT, Pooch Sulzberger & his crew aren't too quick on the uptake; they often are 3 bricks or more shy of a load. Mr Murdoch may be smiling more at what you & E & P have found.