The media’s enduring narratives

It's only fair to share...Share on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterEmail this to someoneShare on Google+

Last Wednesday's terror attack in Jerusalem was unique. Due to the fact that Husam Taysir Dwayat bulldozed his victims outside of Jerusalem Capitol Studios where many of the foreign television networks have their offices, his was one of only two attacks to have been caught live on camera.

The only other attack which was filmed was the lynching of IDF reservists Yosef Avrahami and Vadim Novesche at a Palestinian police station in Ramallah on October 12, 2000. That attack, which showed the mob basking in the blood of the two men, was filmed by an Italian camerawoman from the privately owned Mediaset television station. The attack last Wednesday was filmed by the BBC whose correspondent Tim Franks witnessed the carnage from the outset through his office window.

Their film documentation is not the only thing those two attacks share. The lynch in Ramallah and the attack last Wednesday are also the only attacks that elicited abject apologies by otherwise arrogant media giants. In the aftermath of the lynch, Riccardo Cristiano, Italy's state-owned RAI network's correspondent in Israel, wrote a groveling apology to the Palestinian Authority in which he went to painstaking lengths to explain that it was not his network, but his competitor that published the footage.

In the letter which the PA published in its Al Hayat al Jadida daily, Cristiano fawned, "We always respect the journalistic procedures with the Palestinian Authority for [journalistic] work in Palestine and we are credible in our precise work. We thank you for your trust, and you can be sure that this is not our way of acting. We will not do such a thing."

ON FRIDAY, the BBC published an apology for broadcasting the footage of Wednesday's carnage. The film showed an unarmed, furloughed IDF commando climb onto Dwayat's bulldozer just after Dwayat murdered Batsheva Unterman by crushing her car. It showed the soldier grabbing a gun belonging to a security guard who was unsuccessfully trying to restrain Dwayat and shooting Dwayat three times in the head. The film did not show Dwayat or any of his victims dying. What it showed was the terror of the wounded, Dwayat's murderousness and the soldier's heroism.

Yet, the network declared, "It's not normally the BBC's policy to show the moment of death on screen. These are always extremely difficult decisions to make. However, on reflection, we felt that the pictures featured on Wednesday's News at Ten did not strike the right editorial balance between the demands of accuracy and the potential impact on the program's audience."

At first glance, it is not at all clear what the BBC was talking about. Its film was a journalistic achievement. Through it, tens of millions of people worldwide were able to see for themselves what a terror attack against innocents looks like from a fairly sterile angle. What did the BBC have to apologize for?

In this case, as in the case of the lynching eight years ago, the reason the BBC apologized is not because the film's images were too gruesome, but because it strayed from the accepted narratives of the Palestinian war against Israel. To maintain the narratives, "the right editorial balance between the demands of accuracy and the potential impact on the program's audience," is one that engenders the belief that Israel is either morally indistinguishable from the Palestinians, or that Israel is morally inferior to the Palestinians.

The metaphor for the first narrative is the so-called "cycle of violence." The BBC itself spelled out this narrative in the aftermath of the lynching in Ramallah. In a program called, "When Peace Died," broadcast in November 2000, the BBC explained, "Two images captured the hatred that has destroyed the peace process in the Middle East. Mohammed al-Dura, the boy from Gaza, shielded by his father but still dying under a hail of bullets fired by Israeli soldiers and the lynching and brutal murder of two Israeli reservists by a Palestinian mob."

The metaphor for the second narrative is the Holocaust. It was first used explicitly early on by Catherine Nay, a well-known news anchor from Europe1 network. In late 2000 Nay declared, "The death of Muhammad [al-Dura] cancels out, erases that of the Jewish child, his hands in the air from the SS in the Warsaw Ghetto."

THE STORY of Muhammad al-Dura plays a central role for both narratives. On September 30, 2000, France 2 public television network's bureau chief in Israel Charles Enderlin aired a 57-second, heavily edited film which he proclaimed portrayed then 12-year-old al-Dura being killed by IDF forces at Netzarim Junction in Gaza. France 2 distributed the film for free to the global media and al-Dura's image became the icon of the Palestinian war against Israel. It directly incited anti-Jewish violence in Israel and throughout the world.

Questions about the veracity of the France 2 account arose immediately. An IDF investigation launched by then OC Southern Command Maj.-Gen. Yom Tov Samia proved through ballistic evidence that it was physically impossible for IDF forces to have shot – much less killed – al-Dura. Over the ensuing years, a handful of journalists and researchers produced a wealth of evidence demonstrating that Enderlin's story was false.

One of the researchers was a media critic named Philippe Karsenty. He asserted that the film was a hoax on his Web site Media Ratings and dared Enderlin and France 2 to sue him for libel while demanding that they release the 27 minutes of film they claimed they had of the September 30, 2000 incident at Netzarim Junction.

While refusing to release the footage, Enderlin and France 2 did sue Karsenty for libel. In late 2006, after receiving a letter of recommendation for Enderlin from then French president Jacques Chirac, and in spite of the reams of evidence supporting his claim that Karsenty presented at the trial, the court convicted Karsenty. Karsenty appealed the ruling.

The appellate court ordered Enderlin and France 2 to produce the unedited footage. Although he refused to show the footage in its entirety, from the 19 minutes of rushes that Enderlin did present, three things became obvious. First, the IDF could not have killed al-Dura. Second, the footage showed Palestinians staging scenes of fighting with imaginary IDF forces. And third, the footage showed no evidence that al-Dura had been shot or that he died that day at Netzarim Junction. On May 22, the appellate court overturned Karsenty's conviction.

IT MIGHT have been thought that the French, Israeli and international media which had for seven years supported Enderlin against the small band of independent investigators would finally abandon him. So too, it might have been thought that after seven years of defending an indefensible piece of journalistic malpractice Enderlin would finally own up to his misdeed. But the opposite occurred.

In Israel, leading left-wing commentators like Gideon Levy, and Tom Segev from Ha'aretz, Arad Nir from Channel 2 and Larry Derfner from The Jerusalem Post accused Karsenty and his allies of waging a witch hunt against Enderlain to advance their political agendas. In France, the media initially ignored the story.

Then, less than a week after the verdict, the Who's Who of the rather large anti-Israeli branch of the French media published a petition in the left-wing Le Nouvel Observateur decrying Karsenty's exhaustively documented dossier against the al-Dura story as a "seven-year hate-filled smear campaign." In all, some 300 reporters and hundreds more notables signed the petition. For their part, France 2 and Enderlin announced their intention to appeal the ruling to the French Supreme Court.

In her account of the court case and its aftermath in the Weekly Standard, French journalist Anne-Elisabeth Moutet attributes the French media's reaction to what she sees as a u
niquely French practice of never apologizing for misdeeds.

There is doubtlessly some truth to this. But arrogance is not the unique trait of the French media and elite. And given the near universality of media arrogance, how can one explain the BBC's quick apology for its broadcast of its footage from the attack in Jerusalem last week? And how can one explain Cristiano's obsequious letter to the PA in 2000?

THE ANSWER of course is that arrogance alone cannot account for the media's defense of Enderlin. If Enderlin had been caught broadcasting a libelous report about the Palestinians, the media and France 2 would have cast him off immediately. But here there is more at stake than one man's reputation. Enderlin didn't create the narrative of Palestinian innocence or at least moral equivalence. In filing the clearly false story of al-Dura, Enderlin was advancing a cause that all his anti-Israel colleagues in France, Israel and worldwide have embraced. If he goes down, their indispensable narrative is liable to go down with him.

Over the past eight years of the jihad against Israel, among countless examples, three instances of open media collusion with Israel's enemies stand out for their strategic impact on the course of events. First there is the al-Dura affair. It was followed by the mythical "Jenin massacre" in April 2002. That in turn was followed by the fabricated "massacre" at Kafr Kana in Lebanon in July 2006.

The al-Dura story solidified the Palestinian narrative of victimization by Israel just months after they rejected statehood and peace at Camp David. When the so-called Jenin massacre was reported in April 2002, the IDF was in the midst of Operation Defensive Shield. Just before the Palestinians began making allegations of an Israeli massacre, IDF forces uncovered documentary evidence proving that the Palestinian war against Israel was run by the PA and Yassir Arafat. By fabricating the massacre, the PA was saved from being delegitimized as an actor in Washington. The Israeli peace camp was also resuscitated from its death throes.

As the Winograd Commission documented in its final report on the Second Lebanon War, the media reports of the fabricated massacre of Lebanese civilians by an IAF bomber in Kafr Kana in South Lebanon caused US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice to end US support for an Israeli military victory over Iran's Lebanese proxy and to pressure Israel to accept a cease-fire leaving Hizbullah intact.

Even as analyses of the reports from Jenin and Kafr Kana like the reports on the al-Dura affair clearly demonstrated that the IDF had committed no atrocities, the distorted footage put out by the media made it impossible for Israel to defend itself in the court of public opinion. Like the al-Dura affair, the media's open collusion with the Palestinians in Jenin and Hizbullah in Kafr Kana prolonged false narratives predicated on Israeli aggression just as they were about to be finally laid to rest.

So it is not merely arrogance that makes Enderlin and his colleagues unwilling to come clean anymore than it was humility that made the BBC and Cristiano apologize. Depressingly, what all of this illustrates is that the media will only give us the information they wish us to have. And that information's relationship to the truth is arbitrary at best.

Originally published in The Jerusalem Post.

It's only fair to share...Share on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterEmail this to someoneShare on Google+

12 Comments

  • Marcel Cousineau 07/08/2008 at 18:34

    The more Israel gives in to the Palestinian State agenda of the world,the more Israel is urinated on.
    You wrongly assumed the world would love you more because you without fail capitulate to their demands.
    It’s has had the opposite effect and Israel has become the pariah nation for her weak and willing surrender to the will of the nations.
    This is your reward,your treatment for your submission to their phony peace agenda.
    Even though it is the Palestinian’s who invented the suicide bomber and other atrocities now engulfing the world their bloody hands are held closely while Israel is always blamed for everything and required to suffer for the world’s dubious agenda.
    After reading this article ,my first thought is;
    Why has Israel become so apologetic and subservient to the global media and governments. Your wrong attitude exudes weakness and has brought you scorn and derision.
    It’s as if you have chosen this role of subservient slave to the world because you fail to stand FIRMLY for your rights and the truth.
    You’re always backing down and the Palestinian always take advantage of you as does the world to your lack of backbone.
    You make these evil powerbrokers Lord over you because you ignore Hashem.
    The deck is stacked against Israel and you cannot play this game to win,only to lose.
    SO WHY DO YOU CONTINUE TO PLAY ?
    It is past time to return to Hashem as He alone will give you justice,unlike the nations and their despicable and obnoxious media.

    Reply
  • Marc Handelsman, USA 07/08/2008 at 18:51

    The leftwing court of public opinion presumes Israel is guilty. As much as Israel tries to tell its side in the Arab-Israeli Conflict, many media outlets distort the truth. Israel is one of the most open societies on Earth, and the only transparent one in the Middle East. Even if Israel hired a top-notch “Madison Avenue” public relations agency, it would not be enough to set the record straight. Some people will believe lies about Israel because they are afraid of the truth. And objective truth is what really matters.

    Reply
  • Todd 07/08/2008 at 20:00

    Thank you, Caroline, for unerringly telling the truth.

    Reply
  • Timothy Kriete For Israel FOREVER MORE AMEN 07/08/2008 at 20:46

    AMEN Marcel Cousineau I Thank The LORD Of Glory
    For Voices Such As YOURS AND CAROLINE GLICK’S
    COURAGEOUS BOLD VOICES FOR ZION’S SAKE AMEN.
    Respectfully Submitted With The Total Agape’
    Love Of Jesus Christ Of Nazareth-Thy Servant
    AND Brother Let Everything That Has Breath
    Praise Ye The LORD God Of Abraham, Isaac, and
    Jacob, Genesis 12:1-3 Forever More AMEN :):):)

    Reply
  • Phil S 07/09/2008 at 0:25

    The anti-Israel left is Stalinist and Orwellian. The truth matters less than the message.

    Reply
  • Anne Julienne 07/09/2008 at 6:40

    I print out Caroline’s interviews and articles to be distributed to any friends willing to listen. The mainstream media is morally dead and the clear light of truth needs to be promulgated any other way we can.

    Reply
  • michelle 07/09/2008 at 22:48

    I think a well-publicized award for journalistic irresponsibility should be circulated to shame the French press. Middah keneged middah: let’s use the press to shame the press.

    Reply
  • Cantbelievemyeyesandears 07/09/2008 at 23:56

    BBC: “However, on reflection, we felt that the pictures featured on Wednesday’s News at Ten did not strike the right editorial balance between the demands of accuracy and the potential impact on the program’s audience.” That says it all….The nation that gave the world Churchill has been stripped of it’s testicles and it’s spine. It’s been taken hostage by the Islamo-fascists and the Guardian/BBC-inspired fifth column media and now needs to collectively kiss the Muslim behind to be granted the right to carry on it’s miserable day-to-day existence. And they talk about Jews going to the slaughter like sheep? With the exception of the few thousand serving in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Brits have deteriorated into subnations of drunken louts, intellectually impotent desk-jockey-lads, and morally perverted scum masquerading as journalists.

    Reply
  • Will48 07/10/2008 at 1:59

    Just to correct the name of the one of the lynched IDF reservists, it is Vadim Nourezitz (pronounced noor-zhee-ts). Thanks,

    Reply
  • Shlomo 07/10/2008 at 20:53

    Dear Caroline!
    You know I was shocked today to see Enderlin being live on the Kenesset chanell TV. He was speaking about Olmerts visit to Paris next week.

    Reply
  • Marcel Cousineau 07/11/2008 at 17:19

    “The nation that gave the world Churchill has been stripped of it’s testicles and it’s spine. It’s been taken hostage by the Islamo-fascists and the Guardian/BBC-inspired fifth column media”
    And yet Israel continues to religiously follw their decades old failed agenda ?
    It seems Israel has lost more than her spine ,but her soul ???

    Reply
  • Lynn Britt Barco 07/11/2008 at 17:27

    Cantor ’08: the South’s Best Hope?
    Today the Republican Party sits in complete disarray, split between the pure secularism of the Neoconservatives and the latent anti-Semitism of the Religious Right. Is there a figure who can weave together these disparate tendencies for electoral triumph in ’08? I submit there is … I submit that Rep. Eric Cantor of Richmond is that very man … and the *clear* choice for running-mate on the McCain ticket. His youth alone is enough to cause the Obama enthusiasts to shake in their Birkenstocks.
    The loss of the South during the American Civil War is instructive with regard to the Middle East today. As the inspired anti-Stalinist Leon Trotsky stated long ago, a truly successful revolution myst be GLOBAL in scope … and surrender is not an option.
    COWARDICE IN HIGH PLACES
    Consider the cave-in by advertisers and network executives over on-air remarks by Don Imus. In the Spring of 2002, James S. Hans said as much about “poet” Maya Angelou and no one batted an eye. Why? Because it was mere months after 9/11 when Americans still shared a sharper sense of priorities, back when America knew who the *real* enemy was (Palestinians, al-Qaeda, ad nauseam). Unlike most of the flavor-of-the-month club (read Obama, Obama, Obama), the Honorable Eric Cantor hasn’t forgotten.
    On the race issue in general, the positions of the highest exemplars of Hebrew-Americana (the late Irving Howe and CUNY Professor Michael E. Levin) aren’t that far apart. It is folly to disregard differences in nature within the human species. No one with an elementary background in biology would deny the Negro’s basic humanity, but those of us who, historically, have tried to help are treated increasingly to base ingratitude. Instead of “thank you,” we are taunted instead with cries of “bloodsucker.” Do we deny the Black Man’s contribution to culture? Heavens, no … but many of their most towering figures are either old or in the grave: Ornette Coleman was then, John Zorn is *now*.
    THE EXAMPLE OF REAGAN
    Political scientists agree that it was Ronald Reagan in 1980 who broke, once and for all, the Democratic Party’s hold on the South. And it’s no coincidence that Reagan was a great and dear friend to the Jewish people, appointing Elliott Abrams, a man who continues to serve this nation with honor. But that was nearly 30 years ago and the South longs for a native son on the national ticket with both unassailable conservative principals and a blood connection to Ancient Israel. Southerners and Judaics are, after all, a right and natural fit given our shared Old Testament values. And the symbolic value of Richmond, the city Eric Cantor proudly calls home, is not without significance:
    “When the Civil War came, most Jewish families sent their sons to serve proudly in the Confederate Army. As the human costs of the war escalated, a section in Hebrew Cemetery on Shockoe Hill became the last resting place for many soldiers. They lie in the only known Jewish military cemetery outside Israel. The very unusual cast-iron cemetery fence was designed by Richmond artist William B. Myers and for years after the war the Hebrew Ladies Memorial Association decorated the graves of the fallen each May in a well-attended and moving ceremony.”
    The Jews have survived thousands of years of pain and invective, far beyond that of any Native American, Armenian or West African. Who has endured the hatred inspired by the notorious forgery known as The Protocals? Who continues to suffer the slings and arrows of the hoax circulating in many Christian Bibles as Revelation 3:9? They call us “Scythian,” “Khazar” and every other infamy they can lay their imaginations upon, all without a shred of evidence. It is high time we had a standard bearer on the national ticket – someone less wishy-washy than the unreliable Joe Lieberman – a man unafraid to declare – in his bearing, if not in word – that the Ashkenazim are every bit as legitimate as the 25,000 Jews living in Iran, a nation that, officially, worships the G-d of Abraham, but – in fact – prays to the moon rock enshrined in Mecca.
    In short, this is the time to let Candidate McCain know how you feel about Eric Cantor. McCain may have several paths to the White House, but Cantor represents the most reliably CONSERVATIVE one. Help keep the South solid by supporting a ticket that will work to protect and maintain our Judeo-Christian values and institutions, the very BEDROCK of our nation.
    thank you,
    Lynn Barco
    former volunteer coordinator
    The Museum of the Confederacy

    Reply

Leave a Reply to Marc Handelsman, USA Cancel Reply