Re: The Palestinians Are Finished

On Mar 26, 12:27 pm, "Q" <quond...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Mar 26, 8:59 am, mos...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:


Joel Shurkin <jshur...@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
mos...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx said:
Joel Shurkin <jshur...@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
"Q" <quond...@xxxxxxxxx> said:
mos...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

But you totaly _dismissed_ Camera as a source of _any_ information
just because it's "advocacy" and "propaganda" Why dismiss it out of
hand?

Its value is limited because its approach is to give information
that supports a particular point of view.

That doesn't mean the information is incorrect. It means that other
information -- which might give a clearer picture that would help the
reader form a more informed opinion -- is not being included.

snip

I bet Everybody at SCJM reads it faithfully.

No, actually not everyone does. I have found it to be remarkably
inaccurate itself and ignore it.

Joel, could you tell us about it. Were their translations of the TV
shows or semons in the mosques, inacurate? Did you tell them about
their inaccuracies. You made a very sweeping accusation here. On what
is it based? Inquiring minds want to know.

I can't give you a current example because, as I said, I haven't looked
at it in years. CAMERA is the Fox News of Middle East Reporting. It has
a decidedly right-wing twist to what it does. If you come from that
part of the political spectrum, you love it; if you don't you hate it
or ignore it. Most mainstream journalists I know ignore it. It is not
their translations that are the problem but their interpretation of
what is important and what is not, and what it means that is the issue.
They have a definite bias and attack any in the media who do not
accomodate their bias. For those who like a left-wing bias, I recommend
FAIR [http://www.fair.org/index.php], although much of it is by way of
journalism schools as opposed to interest groups. Both need be taken
with a grain of salt.

Joel, you gave Quondam aid and succor by claiming Camera is
"remarkably inaccurate".

What do you mean "aid and succor?" Am I your enemy or something?
What kind of talk is that? Is there some kind of secret rule here
that nobody is allowed to agree with me?

Clearly that's not the case, since Joel already *did* agree with you,
as did I on that point. But for me, *your* rhetoric makes that
awfully difficult to do.


Yet all you can say is they have a "bias"

They*do* have a bias. And they recruit members to function as shills
-- or watchdogs, if you prefer -- to make sure that the news is
reported in the biased way they prefer.

I don't think that they would argue that they *don't* have a bias.
But you betray your own bias in the way that you phrase this. They
urge members to complain about what *they* perceive as biased or
uneven reporting, in the same manner that any number of organizations
do.

Good morni

ng. Do you know _any_ news media that does _not_ have a

bias? .

Real newspapers don't have a clearly stated agenda, certainly

My real reason for response. Come now, Q. You live in NY, IIRC. Can
you honestly say that you don't know the political leanings of the
major (or minor) newspapers here? Each slants the news through its
own filter.

While you referred exclusively to newspapers, TV news is even easier.
Don't you see a real difference between CNN and FOX?

Is having a bias the same as being "remarkably inaccurate?"

A newspaper can be inaccurate without having a bias. Carelessness is
more frequently the cause of inaccuracy than bias.

Of course it can. But it can also be inaccurate with a bias. Or
accurate with one. Or it can choose its words to convey a certain
message while being scrupulously honest in other details. Compare the
terms *militant* *freedom fighter* and *terrorist* Doesn't each
convey a different meaning to you? Do the same with *Occupied Arab
Jerusalem* *an Arab neighborhood in Jerusalem* and *Jerusalem* Now
try this one. *An American student was beaten today in Jerusalem*
and *an American Jewish student was pulled from his cab in an Arab
neighborhood and beaten by Arabs* Both are absolutely true, but they
convey different stories. These are all games newspapers play.
They're not telling lies, but they're slanting things.

I'm certainly not suggesting that the sole area that this happens is
with respect to Israel or Jews. Its ubiquitous.

Karen Elizabeth

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: The Palestinians Are Finished
    ... reader form a more informed opinion -- is not being included. ... inaccurate itself and ignore it. ... They have a definite bias and attack any in the media who do not ... Real newspapers don't have a clearly stated agenda, ...
    (soc.culture.jewish.moderated)
  • Re: The Palestinians Are Finished
    ... Is having a bias the same as being "remarkably inaccurate"? ... They sometimes would find facts that newspapers get wrong. ...
    (soc.culture.jewish.moderated)
  • Re: The Palestinians Are Finished
    ... inaccurate itself and ignore it. ... They have a definite bias and attack any in the media who do not ... you gave Quondam aid and succor by claiming Camera is ... Real newspapers don't have a clearly stated agenda, ...
    (soc.culture.jewish.moderated)
  • Re: The Palestinians Are Finished
    ... inaccurate itself and ignore it. ... CAMERA is the Fox News of Middle East Reporting. ... They have a definite bias and attack any in the media who do not ...
    (soc.culture.jewish.moderated)
  • Re: The Palestinians Are Finished
    ... Most mainstream journalists I know ignore it. ... They have a definite bias and attack any in the media who do not ... Is having a bias the same as being "remarkably inaccurate"? ... interpretation of what is important and what is not and what it means is the issue.” In that regard, ...
    (soc.culture.jewish.moderated)
Loading