Let us begin at the beginning: a lecture titled A Look at Anti-Israel Media Bias, hosted by the University Jewish Society, was always predestined for contention on a plethora of levels.
Certainly the title denotes a bias itself, but I was intrigued and wilfully hopeful that an alternative, positive perspective would emerge from within an educated and proven argument.
Sadly, it was not to be: presented by Simon Plosker, Managing Editor of HonestReporting, the lecture woefully meandered through PowerPoint slides displaying images of atrocities committed against Palestinians and Lebanese civilians supported by an argument with more holes than a wheel of Swiss cheese.
In sum: most images had been doctored; the pesky Arabs were planting toys in the rubble to gain world sympathy; the elderly woman mourning the loss of her home [left] was a savvy media harlot positioned repeatedly outside broken homes.
The fractured bodies under bricks, iron rods and cement? Merely actors! They were later seen running around!
The plumes of smoke as Beirut crumbled and smouldered under the Israeli attacks in 2006 [below]? My dear, they were merely Photoshopped! There was only one plume of smoke that was duplicated three times. See? Look!
And so it went on.
And on.
Ad infinitum, or so it seemed for one hour.
As image after image slammed onto the projector, Plosker’s explanations grew correspondingly fantastical.
During a lament that the plight of the Palestinians is likened by the media to the Holocaust, he indicated a picture of a young boy – no more than 12 – being hustled by IDF soldiers.
The boy, whose trousers were wet from distress, drew no mercy: “As you can see, oh dear, the boy has wet himself. In reality, it was only a stern talking to.”
I took three pages of lecture notes, but only the adjectives capture the true essence of the lecture: ‘pendantic’, ‘craptastic’, ‘7alaaaas’, ‘bollocks’ and ‘excruciating’.
By minute ‘80 my eloquence had gone out the window and my heart was thumping dully to the waves of nausea and ennui.
Funded by a 160,000 subscriber roll, rather than the Israeli government, members are encouraged to swell the inboxes of national newspapers that portray Israel in a negative manner.
For example, when Newsweek featured a cover illustration lamenting the tragedy of a young Palestinian suicide bomber aged 18, it placed her image alongside one of her victims, an 18-year-old Israeli girl [below].
Both young, both beautiful, both cut off in their prime by the cruelty of politics and conflict.
Unfortunately, for HonestReporting this is not tragic: it is scandalous and akin to placing the pictures of slain students at Virginia Tech alongside that of their killer.
The nuance was missed: the war takes lives on both sides and a life is a life is a life.
Whether the sentence structure does not tickle your nationalist fancy is irrelevant.
When questioned whether their arduous scrutinization of pictures of smoke plumes will change the reality that a disproportionate number of Palestinians and Lebanese die(d) in comparison with Israeli casualties, Plosker reverted to: ‘What if it is my kid? What if bombs fell on her kindergarten? Are you saying it doesn’t matter if my child is killed?’
The general absence of academic argument in favour of conscience-tweaking and speculation was rampant, and the desire to comprehend why one must favour the findings of Israeli bloggers in favour of the BBC/Reuters/AP was never sated.
The question and answers section proved equally inexorable as numerous hands shot up to protest Israeli settlements and the maltreatment of Palestinians.
What struck me was not the hecklers – this is as inherent a part of such an event as hangovers on New Years Day – but the demographic and responses.
Of an audience of around 30, but one Arab attended – a Palestinian journalist who provided the most cogent and constructive critique of Plosker’s speech.
My question is: where were all the Arabs? At the bar? At home watching soaps? Why were they not there?
The lecture was publicized all over the University and while many said they would go, they ultimately did not.
Call it boycott, call it avoiding confrontation; I call it betrayal – in such instances Arab perspectives must be heard.
The audience was made up of young students – many of whom are new to the issue of Palestine-Israel.
As Plosker weaved his Israeli propaganda, so too were their young minds imprinted upon; had it not been for the plucky and vociferous Palestinian journalist, Plosker would have succeeded in convincing the students of the veracity of his argument – that the Arabs are wanton media opportunists and that the real victims are the Israelis.
Voices must be heard and more crucially, the voices of organizations such as HonestReporting must be challenged.
Painful though it is to endure, the propaganda must be heard and responded to: it is not only a battle for politicians and militants, but one for academics and academia alike.
If this point was enough for Plosker to emphasize in his conclusion (albeit to an Israeli angle), as Arabs and sympathizers to the Palestinian cause, so too must we be present.
By all means boycott oranges; but do not boycott ideologies.
Recent Comments