The New York Times today concedes the changing reality in recognizing that the boycott-Israel movement is growing. But it does everything it can to undermine the movement’s impact.
But the first two comments in the paper are from opponents of the measure, a leading Israeli scholar (“It’s almost like a family betrayal,” said Manuel Trajtenberg) followed by Israeli ambassador Ron Dermer. This is followed by a third comment, from Avraham Burg, that says he’s a leftist but he’s against the boycott.
Not until the 16th paragraph does boycott proponent Omar Barghouti get cited with one quotation:
“It is perhaps the strongest indicator yet that the B.D.S. movement is reaching a tipping point, even in the U.S., the last bastion of support for Israel’s unjust system,” he said.
Then it’s back to the negativity. The Times quotes Mahmoud Abbas publicly rejecting boycott of Israel and an adviser to Abbas saying we are not asking anyone to boycott products of Israel.
The Times had to cover this news. But how did they do it? They attacked it before they even told you what it was. You have to get to the 16th paragraph to find anyone who spoke out in favor of it– even though it won, 2-1.
Couldn’t they have found someone in the American Studies Association who voted for it? There were 1252 votes in the ASA. 66 percent were in favor. So that’s more than 800.
They couldn’t find any one of the 800 American scholars to explain why they voted for this historic measure? Not one?
Correction: The last paragraph of the NYT article does include a quotation from a Stanford Professor, David Palumbo-Liu, which seems to support the boycott.