Media Analysis

‘NY Times’ and ‘Washington Post’ have still said nothing about B’Tselem’s finding a month ago that Israel is an ‘apartheid regime’

One month after one of Israel’s leading human rights organizations declared that the country is ruled by an “apartheid” state, liberal Zionists in the U.S. are breathing more easily. The New York Times and the Washington Post have still published nothing on the landmark finding by the human rights group B’Tselem, nor have any of their editorial writers or main columnists chimed in.

Liberal Zionists can relax. With the apartheid designation still a secret to most Americans, groups like J Street don’t have to explain why they still oppose the nonviolent global campaign for Boycott Divestment Sanctions (BDS). 

Media elsewhere did report B’Tselem’s finding that Israel maintains “a regime of Jewish supremacy from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea.” The British Guardian ran an article the day the report appeared, and followed it with an Op-Ed by the human rights group’s quotable (Jewish) leader, Hagai El-Ad. Haaretz, in Israel, was not afraid to cover the report promptly, and followed with at least 2 opinion pieces, by Ilana Hammerman and Gideon Levy.

In the U.S., though, you had to go to the alternative press for comprehensive coverage. The always valuable Mitchell Plitnick had a long analysis in The Nation. And this site covered the apartheid finding repeatedly, including thorough posts by our Yumna Patel and by Robert A.H. Cohen. We also ran Norman Finkelstein’s argument that “Jewish supremacist” was a more accurate description of Israel than “apartheid state.”

No one is asking the New York Times and Washington Post correspondents to agree with B’Tselem’s finding of apartheid. We understand the conventions of mainstream reporting. But the big papers should have at least told their readers that the finding existed, and then sought comment from the other side.

Which that old pro-Israel warhorse, the Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting and Analysis (CAMERA), would have been happy to provide. CAMERA first attacked the anodyne Associated Press report, and two weeks later rattled on for hundreds of words about “Understanding B’Tselem’s ‘Apartheid’ Libel.”

The whole idea is that the mainstream press is supposed to report on major issues, give varying points of view, and let the reader decide. Instead the Times and the Post are censoring themselves — and suppressing vital news to their readers.

The almost complete silence by Times and Post editorialists is even more inexplicable. They are paid to have opinions. What are Thomas Friedman and Bret Stephens afraid of? They could have come right out, summarized the B’Tselem report, and then torn it to pieces. Instead: not a word from either of them. 

11 Comments
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

2 of 2

“He also maintained that, had international legal obligations been purposively enforced years ago, ‘the occupation and the conflict would have been justly resolved and there would have been no need for the ICC process’. 

“Unanswered reports” “The Special Rapporteur elaborated on a number of authoritative UN reports in recent years that have called for accountability and for Israel to meaningfully investigate credible allegations of grave crimes – none of which has been implemented.”  

The msm usually do not abide by the conventions of mainstream reporting on foreign policy. ( Those conventions applied to Democrats vs Republicans before Trump). Instead, they have a list of good countries and bad countries depending on how the Beltway crowd sees things, and they stick to it. Israel has long been considered one of the good guys, albeit with a bit of a conflict going on with the Palestinians and politicians regularly talk about how we share common values ( good ones, we are supposed to assume).

I would be fascinated to see how they would retreat from all this. So far they are sticking to the traditional narrative. So are most American politicians.

“Good dog! Here’s a treat!”

Interesting; “The British Guardian ran an article the day the report appeared, and followed it with an Op-Ed…” The Guardian just the other day fired Nathan Robinson because he joked about the US billions given to Israel every year. The Guardian has fallen a long was since Alan Rusbridger was at the helm. Israel holds the US and UK in its grip by referencing the holocaust at every turn and opportunity. Apparently, this causes so much fear that people are paralyzed and unable to mention the genocide perpetuated daily on the Palestinians, because they will be called (the misused adjective) anti-semitic. (Arabs are Semites; very very Jews in Israel are.) Notice the forced adoption by universities, and even entire countries, of the IHRA (International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance) language ruling. It’s time to throw off that paralysis and face the truth, at which time Israel will lose its grip on the western world’s mainstream press.

Related news:
1 of 2
New ICC ruling ‘opens the door’ for justice in occupied Palestine – Independent UN expert | | UN News

“New ICC ruling ‘opens the door’ for justice in occupied Palestine – Independent UN expert” – UN News, Feb. 9/21

EXCERPT:
“The ruling of the International Criminal Court (ICC) that it does have jurisdiction over grave crimes committed in occupied Palestinian territory is a ‘significant step forward in the quest for justice and accountability’, an independent UN human rights expert said on Tuesday.”

“’This offers profound hope to those who believe that consequences, not condonation, must be the answer to the commission of grave crimes’, said Michael Lynk, the Special Rapporteur for the situation of human rights in the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967.  

“The judgement, which includes potential war crimes, is a major move towards ending impunity in the 53-year-old occupation of the West Bank, including East Jerusalem and Gaza. 

“’The leading political organs of the United Nations have repeatedly failed to enforce their own significant body of resolutions on the Israeli occupation’, the UN expert said. ‘This ruling opens the door for credible allegations of Rome Statute crimes to finally be investigated and potentially reach the trial stage at the ICC.’ 
Probing the past 

“The ICC prosecutor can now investigate a number of past allegations, including ‘grave crimes’ committed by Israel during the 2014 war against Gaza, the killing and wounding of thousands of largely unarmed demonstrators during the Great March of Return in 2018-2019 and Israel’s settlement activities in East Jerusalem and the West Bank, according to the press release from OHCHR.  

“Moreover, the prosecutor can also look into allegations of grave crimes involving Palestinian armed groups.  

“’In adopting the Rome Statute and creating the International Criminal Court, the international community pledged its determination to end impunity for the perpetrators of grave crimes’, the Special Rapporteur stated. ‘Yet, in the context of Israel’s protracted occupation, the international community has permitted a culture of exceptionalism to prevail’. (cont’d)