Augean Stables

(Post by Lazar) A.J. Liebling once said, “Newspapers write about other newspapers with circumspection”. As is usually the case, the Israelis are the exception to the rule. The following Jerusalem Post op-ed, by Isi Liebler, excoriates Haaretz, and in particular its editor David Landau, for its bias against Israel. At the heart of the accusation lie basic journalistic ethics. In order for media to serve its role in a democracy, the journalist in the Western world must be impartial, and not let personal prejudices and political motivation stand in the way of journalistic standards. Landau’s boast that he had intentionally “soft-pedaled” allegations of corruption against Prime Ministers Sharon and Olmert in order not to weaken their support as they worked toward a peace process should jolt any observer who understands the value of a responsible free press in a democratic society. The fact that Landau felt comfortable airing such a transgression is perhaps more alarming. It suggests an atmosphere among journalists in Israel, indeed across the West, that condones the promotion of a certain ideology at the expense of the standards that should serve as a guide to Western media.

(Interlinear comments by RL)

Shame on Ha-Aretz
Isi Liebler
November 6, 2007

We frequently boast that notwithstanding its limitations, the Israeli media is unfettered by government intervention and could serve as a role model for a free press in any democracy.

As in most Western countries, Israeli journalists are inclined to the Left and substantially outnumber the more conservative-minded. In fact, one constantly hears complaints that to hold right-wing views is a major stumbling block in obtaining promotion in the media world. But that is not unique to Israel.

The majority of Israelis who read a newspaper on a daily basis read one of the tabloids. In that sense, the broadsheet Haaretz stands alone. It presents as a serious liberal newspaper and aspires to assume the mantle of a Hebrew-language counterpart to The New York Times. Despite a limited circulation, it is extraordinarily influential and read by most opinion makers.

Its news coverage and access to inside information exceeds that of the tabloids. However, whereas it carries superb pieces on culture and society, with especially insightful articles on religious issues, its frequent endorsement of radical policies does tend to increasingly link Haaretz with fringe rather than mainstream opinion.

Indeed, many would even argue that a considerable proportion of Haaretz editorials and op-ed columns are politically off the wall. Its op-ed and magazine articles demonizing Israel and inclined toward post-Zionism are increasingly being quoted by Arabs and anti-Israeli propagandists. In fact, a man from Mars observing the level of the newspaper’s frequent vitriolic condemnations of Israeli governments could understandably be misled into believing that some Haaretz writers are consciously acting as propagandists for the Palestinian cause.

I had precisely this experience when I presented the al Durah Affair to a class on Communications Revolutions, and assigned a number of readings, including Ha-Aretz’s coverage of the Israeli commission of inquiry. One of the students commented,
“I thought Ha-Aretz was an Israeli paper.”
“It is,” I replied. “Why do you ask?”
“Because it sounds like a Palestinian paper.”
It wasn’t just its critique, but the tone of it… as if the authors were trying hard to avoid embarrassment at the flaws in the report by jumping in ahead of everyone else and showing they could be more contemptuous than anyone. Don’t you shoot at someone on “my” side, I’ll do it for you, and in so doing, prove that at least “I” am a good person.

[snip]

Since David Landau assumed the role of editor at Haaretz, the newspaper’s traditional bias relating to the Israel-Palestinian conflict has intensified.

Landau concentrates much of his wrath on religious Zionists, regarding those who settled across the Green Line as messianic lunatics and the greatest threat to Israel. This obviously makes him a darling of the ultra-Left.

This demonization of the settlers is a direct product of an aggressive application of the PCP. Only if the Palestinians really want a state do the settlers become an obstacle to peace. If, as Steyn put it last night, the Palestinians have never shown any interest in a state and, given the choice between a state and killing Jews, have always chosen the latter, then the presence of settlements, while possibly a problem, fades into considerably lesser insignificance when dealing with the real causes of the conflict.

And yet, especially during the Oslo “Peace” Process, as an act of good faith, the Israeli left demonized their intransigent settler movement to show how eager they are to make peace. Meanwhile, the Palestinians apologized and justified their far more vicious radical side, and when the process broke down, blamed it successfully on the provocation of the “settlers.” The continued demonization of the settlers by the Israeli left shows just how little they have learned from their folly. “When deep in the PCP hole, keep digging.”

Today Landau allegedly even refuses to correct articles containing blatantly false information if they conflict with his political agenda. According to the Web site of the highly respected American Jewish media watchdog organization CAMERA, not only did Landau decline to consider its complaints regarding alleged falsehoods published in Haaretz, he even went on record informing the JTA that “as a matter of principle” he had instructed his staff not to respond to criticism from CAMERA because they were a “McCarthyite” organization.

Interesting move by Landau, and typical of the kind of mis-applied lesson that we should have learned from McCarthyism. It’s not that McCarthy was inventing the danger of communism; he turned it into a witch hunt that struck at many innocent people. He played fast and loose with facts, and showed profound bad faith. He was a classic case of paranoia in a position of power. CAMERA, by contrast, is a highly responsible group that documents everything it says, and has an excellent record of responsible critique of the MSM, which has, like McCarthy, sacrificed any kind of responsible use of information into a platform for its own agendas.

Last night Mark Steyn spoke about the way the “Never Again,” a pledge to the memory of the Holocaust dead has been transformed into hollow moral preening: Never again power politics, never again nationalism, never again fürhers… which in effect opens the way for it to happen again. “Down with McCarthyism” now plays the same role.

NEEDLESS to say, this casts an ugly shadow on a daily newspaper purporting to represent the highest levels of journalistic integrity. It is now widely accepted that many policies promoted by Haaretz are effectively supportive of Israel’s adversaries.

In fact, Nahum Barnea, the distinguished Yediot Aharonot columnist, went so far as to describe senior Haaretz journalists Gideon Levy, Amira Haas and Akiva Eldar as failing to pass the “lynch test” - i.e., even failing to condemn Palestinians when they murdered two Israelis in a lynch mob in Ramallah at the onset of the second intifada.

In other words, they are perfect illustrations of the unconsciously racist attitude that Charles Jacobs denounced as The Human Rights Complex: it doesn’t matter who the victim is, or how badly they suffer, but who victimizes — if it’s whites, it’s terrible; if it’s enraged third worlders, who are we to judge?

More recently, consistent with frequent Haaretz depictions of Israel as a racist entity, the paper’s chief Arab affairs expert, Danny Rubinstein, told a UN body that Israel was indeed an apartheid state.

Of course, behind this torrid situation stands the publisher of Haaretz, Amos Schocken, who is personally convinced that Israel does indeed practice apartheid.

BUT IT was only recently that Landau threw away all semblance of journalistic integrity and publicly confessed to crossing the ultimate red line that distinguishes reputable journalism from propaganda.

According to The Jerusalem Post, at the recent Russian Limmud Conference in Moscow, Landau, one of the few non-Russian-speaking participants, dropped a bombshell. He stunned those present by boasting that his newspaper had “wittingly soft-pedalled” alleged corruption by Israeli political leaders including prime ministers Ariel Sharon and Ehud Olmert, when, in the opinion of Haaretz, the policies of those leaders were advancing the peace process.

In other words, as far as Landau is concerned, the public needs to be manipulated to do what he (and his colleagues) think is “the right thing.” This is the very definition of propaganda and profoundly undemocratic. It’s the kind of behavior that will work only so long as the public trusts the MSM. Soft power is great, but when you lose it, it’s very hard to win it back.

When participants challenged him concerning the morality of such an approach, Landau responded with the extraordinary assertion that “more immorality happens every day at a single roadblock [in Judea and Samaria] than in all the scandals put together.”

What’s so striking about this is that were you to say in defense of the humiliating road blocks that they are a response to far more terrible things the Palestinians did — suicide terror — he would respond by insisting that two wrongs don’t make a right. The moral confusion here is only matched by the supreme arrogance of the confused.

He then unashamedly assured those present that Haaretz was ready to repeat the process in order “to ensure that Olmert goes to Annapolis.”

Even former Bolsheviks in the audience must have gasped at such views, openly stated, which incorporated all the hallmarks of the Stalinist era.

It is surely scandalous for the top editor of what purports to be a reputable and prestigious daily newspaper to publicly proclaim - and take pride in - having deliberately “soft-pedalled” and possibly even covered up acts of corruption by senior political leaders in order to promote his own political agenda, and, moreover, boast that his paper would continue to do so in the future.

Could one, for instance, visualize The New York Times suppressing information about an American president involved in corruption out of a desire to promote the administration’s foreign policyobjectives?

Yes, but not admitting it publicly. Such a remark puts him ahead of even so brazenly dishonest a media culture as the one revealed by Clément Weill-Raynal in his comments on the Al Durah case.

No newspaper of integrity in the world would tolerate an editor making such an outrageous statement.

THE ISRAELI Press Council code of ethics contains clauses explicitly condemning such practices. Article 40 (and 16a): “A newspaper or a journalist shall not refrain from publishing information where there is a public interest in its publication, including for reasons of political, economic or other pressures.”

Article 7: “Mistakes, omissions or inaccuracies which are in the publication of facts must be corrected speedily….”

If in the face of such violations of their charter by the editor of one of their most prestigious newspapers the Press Council fails to publicly condemn such behavior, it should be dissolved and the public must demand an accounting.

Exploiting a newspaper as a propaganda vehicle for a clique of leftist ideologues willing to do anything, including suppressing or “soft-pedalling” information about potentially criminal actions in order to pursue a private agenda must not be tolerated in a country which purports to adhere to ethical and democratic norms of conduct.

The writer chairs the Diaspora-Israel relations committee of the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs and is a veteran international Jewish leader.

ileibler@netvison.net.il

This may strike many on the “left” as a minor infraction not worth the fuss that Liebler is making over it (a variant on “so what if we did something immoral; there’s a lot worse going on” theme Landau hit with his invocation of the checkpoints. But if it’s the tip of the iceberg, then we’re in deep trouble.

Taking steps now to punish such journalistic dishonesty would go a long way towards cleaning up the Augean Stable.