Soccer Dad

Last refuge of a journalist

Last year, the Washington Post ran an op-ed by Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh, this is now Deborah Howell, the Post's ombudsman, defended the decision to run the terrorist propaganda.

Good editorial pages and commentators enlighten and provoke readers to broaden their thinking. Cohen's and Haniyeh's pieces indeed were provocative. But there were plenty of pro-Israel op-ed pieces, including one by Charles Krauthammer, who urged Israel to invade Lebanon and expel Hezbollah. And Post columnist David Ignatius is a must-read on the Middle East. The Post's editorials have expressed concern that Hamas and Hezbollah not be given legitimacy; that Israel not overplay its military hand; that Syria and Iran's influence be curtailed; and that the United States, its allies and the United Nations should be involved to find a way toward peace.

I'm not going to rehash my response, but if you wish, it is here.

Howell's comments are worth recounting though when we consider today's column by the New York Times's new ombudsman/public editor/"empty suit" Clark Hoyt responded to complaints about the paper's decision to run an op-ed by Ahmed Yousef, described as a political advisor to Haniyeh. Why has the Times granted some prime op-ed space to Yousef?

But some opinions provoke more than others. ...
The most recent column was by Ahmed Yousef, a spokesman for Hamas, the party elected to lead the Palestinian government and a group dedicated to the destruction of Israel. He wrote Wednesday about “What Hamas Wants.”

Many readers were outraged, complaining that The Times had provided a platform for a terrorist. One, Jon Pensak of Sherborn, Mass., said that allowing Yousef space in The Times “isn’t balanced journalism, it is more the dissemination of propaganda in the spirit of advocacy journalism.”

Well, yes. The point of the op-ed page is advocacy. And, Rosenthal said, “we do not feel the obligation to provide the kind of balance you find in news coverage, because it is opinion.”

David Shipley, one of Rosenthal’s deputies and the man in charge of the op-ed page, said: “The news of the Hamas takeover of Gaza was one of the most important stories of the week. ... This was our opportunity to hear what Hamas had to say.”

I agree that Yousef’s piece should have run, even though his version of reality is at odds with the one I understand from news coverage. He wrote blandly, for example, about creating “an atmosphere of calm in which we resolve our differences” with Israel without mentioning that Hamas is officially dedicated to raising “the banner of Allah over every inch of Palestine,” which would mean no more Israel.

Ah there's that word again "provoke." Provocation is the last refuge of the journalist. But Hoyt, like Howell last year, is making a fundamental mistake. Provoking debate might be one component of an open and free press, but it is not identical to press freedom. Another (arguably more important) component would be an independent media, free of government control or intimidation.

But press freedom is one of the components of the Western idea of freedom. Other components include due process

Hamas was not using a random hit list. Every Hamas patrol carried with it a laptop containing a list of Fatah operatives in Gaza, and an identity number and a star appeared next to each name. A red star meant the operative was to be executed and a blue one meant he was to be shot in the legs - a special, cruel tactic developed by Hamas, in which the shot is fired from the back of the knee so that the kneecap is shattered when the bullet exits the other side. A black star signaled arrest, and no star meant that the Fatah member was to be beaten and released. Hamas patrols took the list with them to hospitals, where they searched for wounded Fatah officials, some of whom they beat up and some of whom they abducted.

freedom of religion

Christians living in Gaza City on Monday appealed to the international community to protect them against increased attacks by Muslim extremists. Many Christians said they were prepared to leave the Gaza Strip as soon as the border crossings are reopened.

The appeal came following a series of attacks on a Christian school and church in Gaza City over the past few days.

Father Manuel Musalam, leader of the small Latin community in the Gaza Strip, said masked gunmen torched and looted the Rosary Sisters School and the Latin Church.

"The masked gunmen used rocket-propelled grenades to storm the main entrances of the school and church," he said. "Then they destroyed almost everything inside, including the Cross, the Holy Book, computers and other equipment."

liberal education

Palestinian children spend more of their school day studying Islam. Critical jobs in public education are filled by Islamic stalwarts. A once-banned social studies reader, crammed with hard-line rhetoric, is now in classrooms.

During a year in power, the Islamic Hamas movement has begun taking control of Palestinian schools and is making changes.

Hamas leaders insist they are not trying to indoctrinate children. But moderate Palestinians say Hamas' goal is nothing less than shaping the political views of future generations.

And of course press freedom is essential to a free society.

HAMAS'S armed wing yesterday warned Palestinian journalists against criticising its firing of rockets from Gaza into Israel after several opinion columns claimed the rockets harmed the Palestinians themselves.

The warning made by Abu Obeida, the head of the Izzedin al-Qassam militia, which fires the rockets, came on the same day that an Israeli computer technician was killed by a rocket fired into the Israeli border town of Sderot. Both Israel and Hamas appear poised for further confrontation despite efforts by moderate Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas to get them to agree to a ceasefire.

Abu Obeida said in a statement carried by Hamas's Palestine Information Centre: "The time has come for the strange voices and the yellow media to stop stabbing the resistance in the back and go back to the right way. If not, history and the people will not have mercy on any who collude with the enemy against their religion, people and nation."

(h/t Yid with Lid)

By granting Ahmed Yousef this year (and Ismail Haniyeh last year) the privilege of presenting their views on their op-ed pages, American papers have allowed the Hamas government to exploit one freedom to divert attention from the way it denies freedoms to its own citizens.

I realize that, to many in the media, Israel's right to exist is a debatable proposition, but maybe the idea of freedom isn't. Why is it that these media people use one element press freedom to defend a decision that undermines freedom?

media bias, hamas.

Posted by SoccerDad at June 25, 2007 5:16 AM | TrackBack