By Jason Maoz, Senior Editor
The Jewish Press, July 25, 2008

Honestreporting.com is out with a study of how The New York Times covered Israel in 205 news stories between July 2007 and June 2008. The verdict: particularly in the way it employs headlines and photos, “it is clear that there is an inherent bias in New York Times reporting about the conflict that favors the Palestinians,”

The survey found that some 82 percent of headlines atop articles about Israeli military actions “were written in a direct style in which the words ‘Israel’ or ‘Israeli Forces (or a similar phrase) were the subject. In the majority of these cases, no details were given as to whether the casualties were combatants or civilians.” The headlines of those stories favored strong verbs such as ‘kills” or “shoots” and “the object of the sentence was usually the number of casualties listed, often without any other details.”

The study cited a number of examples, among them:
“sraeli Forces Kill 6 in Gaza”; “Israeli Air strike Kills Top Militant”; and “Israeli Forces Kill 9 in Gaza.” In glaring contrast, the survey revealed that just 20 Percent of articles describing Palestinian attacks named the group responsible. Most of these headlines were written in a passive, less direct style that removes responsibility of the attack from those who caused it. An example of this type of headline ran on May 13, 2008: ‘Rocket Fired from Gaza Kills Woman in Southern Israel.’” Other examples of this passive style include “Rocket Endangers Palestinian-Israel Respite”; “Strikes Kill Israeli Worker and 4 Year Old Child”; “Rocket Hits Israel, Breaking Hamas “Peace.”

This tactic of the Times was cited by the Monitor in a 2005 column titled “Passive Voice Genocide”: The day after a recent Netanya suicide bombing, this is how The New York Times headlined its story: “Suicide Bomber and 2 Women Die in Attack at Mall in Israeli Town.” Talk about imprecise language and fuzzy imagery. Were the suicide bomber and the two women killed by a swarm of killer bees? Shot by Israeli police? Felled by simultaneous heart attacks? Were the women perchance accomplices of the bomber?

Would not a more literate — certainly a more accurate — headline have read, “Suicide Bomber Kills Two Women in Attack at Mall in Israeli Town”? It seems that if the Times can’t paint a particular news story in the pale pastels of moral equivalence the next best thing is to come up with a headline written in what grammarians call the passive voice – in this case lumping a terrorist together with his victim – all three of whom are described as having simply died.

Lest anyone accuse the Monitor of quibbling, consider what language expert Marylaine Block has to say about the use and abuse of the passive voice in writing, “It permits us to sanitize horrendous actions and make them more acceptable.”

The Honest Reporting survey was also critical of the Time’s use of photography. “No matter how accurately a news story is written,” the study noted, “an accompanying photograph may destroy all objectivity as the reader is emotionally steered away from the facts by a moving image. When images that evoke sympathy for one side in a conflict are shown in far greater numbers than those which capture the anguish and suffering of the other side, it is a clear case of bias.

“In our review, we counted 73 images that could be described as supporting either the Israeli or Palestinian side. Three quarters of these images evoke sympathy for the Palestinians and portray a scene lacking in context. Even though these pictures are not taken by New York Times photographers, it is a Times editorial judgment as to which wire service images should run with a story.”

While the study acknowledges that none of the headlines under consideration could be classified, on an individual basis, as untruthful, it was the sum of the parts that told the story — clearly a pattern that places more weight on Israeli actions than those of the Palestinians. Balanced reporting requires that a consistent style be used no matter who is the initiator of the event. Ascribing the attack to an inanimate object such as a rocket over and over again indicates bias.”

This entry was posted on Tuesday, August 5th, 2008 and is filed under press.