War news
On Saturday, we published this photo on the front page. On Monday, we got a letter that expressed this sentiment: My immediate thought was -- Israel brace yourself, you're now in for the same above-the-fold skewed imagery from the liberal press that has plagued our military and the war effort for so many months.
Whenever the war hits a fever pitch as it has recently in the Middle East and it moves onto our front pages, readers see hidden agendas in our coverage. As in this case, we quickly get categorized as pro-Israel or pro-Palestinian based on a photograph.
Virtually every photograph worth publishing can be perceived to "take a side" because photographers are either assigned to be in Israel or in Lebanon. We choose photos that are compelling, tell a story by themselves and provide some context for the news of the day. Over the course of time, photos of "both sides" should be pretty even.
Comments (6)
To report abuse of the comment feature on this site, please use the feedback form at the bottom of any page.
"Whenever the war..."
THE war? Which war is that?
Posted on July 19, 2006 10:36 PM
I thought this particular photo was a good choice. And the story it tells me is the story of all conflicts with the terrorist. The Palestinian man (represnting terrorist) is trying to remove the gun from the Israeli soldier whlie holding a child (terrorist hiding behind civilian population while they lob rockets at Israel and shoot at Israeli soldiers out in the open and identitfied by uniforms). Really enjoyed the expression on the soldier's face!
Posted on July 20, 2006 12:36 PM
"we quickly get categorized as pro-Israel or pro-Palestinian based on a photograph..."
My gamut of friends out of town all asked the same question at dinner: How is YOUR newspaper covering this?
The implied point was, are they taking a side or reporting without emotion or using photos to create a point or.... Pretty much, I said the N&R wants to bring a Greensboro/Local touch to the report and that most international news comes via AP or similar (I hope that's right) - my point was that you don't have reporters on the ground in Beirut or Tel Aviv.
But the question was there: how is the newspaper in your (non-NY, non-DC, non-big-city) town slanting (or not) this news? (implied: this news is different; need I explain?)
And no, JR, it does NOT even out. "Evening out" is what you do with the Olympics. You don't "even out" when a country has been a victim of terrorist bombings for decades. There are some good guys and bad guys left in the world, and no, no one is completely good or completely bad and yes, there are two or more sides to every story, but this is about the existence of a free nation -- or not. It's not a small deal.
[OK, wait for it. The comments are coming. I'm not going to argue about it here. Enjoy.]
Posted on July 20, 2006 4:33 PM
I'll let others argue the geopolitical point with you, Sue. But did the photograph we published indicate to you our bias in favor of the Palestinians? Did it reflect an Israeli officer bullying a Palestinian or was the Palestinian being particularly provocative, grabbing the soldier's rifle barrel, which most everyone would know is a bad idea? The caption doesn't really say. My only point is that people tent to read it the way they want to. And that those perceptions ought to be even over the course of time.
Posted on July 20, 2006 5:03 PM
Forgetting the photo itself for a sec, consider the question that is asked only when Israel is the subject, "How is YOUR newspaper handling it?" The question rarely gets asked on other topics (except a few notables). The question itself speaks volumes.
Posted on July 20, 2006 6:26 PM
Here's a way to handle it online from Syracuse.
http://www.syracuse.com/news/tracker/
Posted on July 22, 2006 12:18 PM