Investigative group falls short of exemplary journalism and panders to partisan bias
ProPublica describes itself as "an independent, non-profit newsroom that will produce investigative journalism in the public interest. Our work will focus exclusively on truly important stories, stories with 'moral force.' We will do this by producing journalism that shines a light on exploitation of the weak by the strong and on the failures of those with power to vindicate the trust placed in them."
So one of their first big "exposes," produced in conjunction with the powerful investigative journalism broadcast media, CBS 60 Minutes, is about how a television station designed to promote pro-American propaganda (at the expense of truth and honesty) that is funded by the U.S. Government is "biased" because ... (aghast!) ... it criticized Israel.
Yes. This could be the first real evidence that American journalism is driven by one very important priority: "to protect Israel."
ProPublica discovered, with the backing of CBS 60 Minutes, that al-Hurra TV, the American government funded satellite TV station created in the wake of allegations by President Bush (an icon of investigative journalism) that the Arab World media is "anti-American" and a purveyor of "propaganda that “just isn’t right, it isn’t fair, and it doesn’t give people the impression of what we’re about.”
So, that's the job of al-Hurra TV. Funded by American taxpayers, controlled by the U.S. Government. And the biggest problem it has according to an exhaustive investigation into al-Hurra's programming by ProPublica's esteemed investigative journalists, is that they discovered "one extremist" Palestinian, Hani el-Masri, who, on a program on al-Hurra TV, called Israel some names. The exact quote from the "investigation" is: "[Israel] is the occupying and racist state that imposes the stifling and deadly blockade and perpetrates a holocaust against 1.5 million Palestinians in Gaza."
And worse, according to ProPublica, is, el-Masri's comments (in Arabic to a mainly Arabic audience) went "unchallenged."
Now, I don't like Israel's policies in the Gaza Strip or for that matter in the West Bank where my relatives live and are often treated like animals. But I wouldn't call it "racist" or even compare its brutal policies against the Palestinians to the "Holocaust."
The program that al-Masri made his comments is, ironically called, "The Free Hour." The name of the station in Arabic, al-Hurra, means "the free one." (Or, one that is free.) I guess it ain't so free at all, is it?
Al-Hurra, which is supposed to help educate the people of the Arab World by showing them how real Democracy and Freedom work (let me take a deep breath here), even broadcast a speech by Hezbollah Leader Hassan Nasrallah, presumably during the war between Hezbollah and Israel last summer.
ProPublica also discovered as evidence, "A few weeks later, an Al Hurra reporter named Ahmed Amin delivered a biased report from the Holocaust Denier’s Conference in Tehran. He said that while some participants were sure that millions of Jews died in Germany, 'the group did not reinforce their statements with scientific evidence, but instead they were content to tell stories passed on to them by their ancestors'." (Congress demanded Amin be fired even though the report suggested that the reporter accurately described the ridiculous nature of the conference's content. The news director, Larry Register, was fired.)
ProPublica asserts that "Investigative journalism is at risk. Many news organizations have increasingly come to see it as a luxury. Today’s investigative reporters lack resources: Time and budget constraints are curbing the ability of journalists not specifically designated “investigative” to do this kind of reporting in addition to their regular beats. This is therefore a moment when new models are necessary to carry forward some of the great work of journalism in the public interest that is such an integral part of self-government, and thus an important bulwark of our democracy."
This is ProPublica's model. Let's defend Israel against the angry, emotion-filled rhetoric of a Palestinian who probably has seen many of his friends and colleagues killed -- over the past year in the Gaza Strip, according to a news report on CBS I heard, Palestinian killed 7 Israelis with rocket fire. During the same period, Israel killed 40 Palestinians.
The issue for me isn't about whether Israel is or isn't racist, or even whether al-Masri is or isn't an extremist. The issue to me is that the report from ProPublica reflects not professional journalism, but rather a crystal clear reflection of the biased, unprofessional, hypocritical, no-talent, bigotry that passes as "journalism" in the mainstream American media that is important only because it defends Israel and silences any Arab, Muslim or Palestinian who dares to even criticize Israel's government policies.
I am not criticizing Israelis. I criticize the Israeli "government," the same way I criticize the American government AND the same way I criticize the Arab governments. That is principled journalism, and apparently in the United States, courageous journalism, too.
What is really pathetic is that in America, a place where "all men are created equal" (apparently some are just more equal than others, I guess), no one has the courage to accurately depict the real challenge in the Middle East. It's not about Palestinians and Arabs and Muslims versus Israelis and Jews. IT IS about separating the "moderates" from the "extremists" and recognizing that this complex conflict that has a direct impact on the American people. Our interests as a nation are served not by pandering to partisan politics, or censoring a news media, but rather fighting to insure an open and unrestrained public debate where even the extremists have a voice. (Moderation IS moderation only because it is placed next to extremism.)
ProPublica is led by Paul Steiger, the former managing editor of The Wall Street Journal, a newspaper that many Middle East professionals would acknowledge has been about as far as a newspaper can be from balance and objectivity on Middle East issues as one can be.
Here's the link to the ProPublica report:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/06/19/60minutes/main4196477.shtml
In this country of more than 4,500 newspapers, thousands of radio stations and many thousands of television stations, only a handful of Arab American professional journalists have been hired as columnists. There are some newspapers -- usually the biggest -- that will publish columns that can be characterized as "pro-Arab," but for the most part, very few newspapers will run a pro-Arab column of any kind. In fact, when the media does include the Arab viewpoint, and especially the Palestinian viewpoint, it is oftentimes "partnered" with the pro-Israel viewpoint. (Ironically, when a pro-Israel column is published, that is not the case.)
Al-Hurra is a government sponsored propaganda outlet, not a professional journalism medium, as much as they claim they are, and no disrepect to the journalism talent hired to work there. But, they live under government funding and censorship. The real issue should be how public dollars are being spent to spread propaganda rather than truth, to oppress free speech rather than encourage it, and that is sending a message the Arab audience is intelligent enought o see that "freedom" has two meanings in America, one for Americans and one for Arabs.
ProPublica could investigate those issues. But then, if they did, no one in the United States would fund ProPublica, no major television station would partner with it to give it credibility, and all but only a very few courageous voices in the mainstream American media would denounce it "as unchallenged pro-Arab propaganda" and demand that they be put out of business.
Ray Hanania
www.TheMediaOasis.com