“This is another in a series of incidents where you impute motives to me that aren’t there, I clarify for you what I meant, and you continue to tell me I meant something else.”
I am doing no such thing. I am saying that your initial answer was evasive and promoted by inference a false conclusion, because you’re trying to narrow things beyond reason, rather than addressing the larger point, because you think it benefits your side.
“What side did Jodi Rudoren take on the conflict before she went to cover it? ”
Well, if Jeffrey Goldberg will vouch for her, then I’d say she wasn’t a neutral person. (And being a Hebrew speaker, how can she expect to understand the other side first hand?)
“It’s largely because they’re Jewish that the pro-Palestinian movement doesn’t like them. ”
No, as Alison’s great article demonstrates, it’s because they’ve only been Jews and bureaus chiefs for the past few decades, because the coverage is pro-Israeli and because, after the fact, they admit that they tilted the reporting as much.
“Weir wrote this before Rudoren wrote a word of reportage.”
Yes, and she wrote the article to decry the fact that the pattern appeared to be continuing, and with the hopes (since dashed, I believe) that Rudoren would be different.
“She didn’t bother to mention that Sontag was one of the first American writers to challenge the Israeli narrative regarding the collapse of peace talks in 2000.”
Not specifically, no. But she did reference Sontag’s work, very fairly, I thought, “It’s interesting to note that the Times’ only other female Jerusalem bureau chief, Deborah Sontag, often provided exemplary coverage; her term seems to have ended early.”
“Would you accept this for any other group?”
Define “this”… because if you’re saying, “would I accept a decades-long string of assignments that take one side of a conflict” then no, I wouldn’t, but you don’t seem to care, because you don’t want to look at the actual results of what these people are doing.
“Would you argue that African-Americans shouldn’t be assigned to cover inner-city neighborhoods? Would you argue that Arab reporters shouldn’t cover Egypt?”
Neither of these are relevant in any way. I think that these beats should be assigned without regard for the background of the people. But I also would not stick my head in the sand and pretend that if people from the same exact background are, again and again and again assigned to a position, without fail, for decades, that there is no connection between the two. Especially when it is the site of an ethno-religious conflict and that unbroken string of bureau chiefs belongs to one of the ethno-religious blocks.