Britannia Radio

Just Journalism Newsletter 30 October 2009

This Week · Analysis of the skewed reporting of the United Nations Human Rights Council vote on the Goldstone Report. · How The Independent shone a light on Arab states' role in the Palestinian refugee problem. · Summary of arguments made at roundtable event on how journalists report international law issues.   Goldstone's criticism of one-sided UN resolution ignored On 16 October, the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) passed Resolution S-12/1, endorsing the Goldstone Report and pointedly condemning Israel. It made no mention of Hamas' aggression against communities in southern Israel despite the fact that this is mentioned in the report. The resolution further criticised Israel's policies in east Jerusalem and the holy sites. The report's author, Richard Goldstone, criticised the resolution for its one-sidedness but this aspect of the story was inadequately addressed in subsequent reporting. On the other hand, all of the publications emphasised Israel's hostility towards the resolution. Only The Times offered a full account, including a key quote from Goldstone. The remaining broadsheets and the BBC either totally omitted the fact that Hamas was not criticised in the resolution or played down the fact. The clearest example of the decontextualisation of Israel's opposition to resolution S-12/1 was in Rory McCarthy's article in The Guardian, 'Israel angrily rejects UN resolution that could open the way for Gaza war crimes investigations'. It opened: 'Israel has angrily rejected what it called a "one-sided" resolution by the UN human rights council yesterday that backed a highly critical report on the Gaza war'. However, it failed to mention anywhere in the page spread the reason for Israel's rejection. Israel's rejection was reiterated later in the article, following McCarthy's speculation that the vote 'may result in a US veto at the UN security council to protect Israel from scrutiny.'   Quoting an Israeli official stating that, 'Israel rejects the one-sided resolution' and noting that 'Israel has criticised the council in the past for an anti-Israel bias' the piece simply excluded the fact that the UNHRC resolution in question solely criticised Israel. Click here to continue reading.   Independent examines other side to Palestinian refugee issue The Independent supplement, 'Independent Life', recently ran an unusual cover story on Palestinian refugees. 'No way home: The tragedy of the Palestinian diaspora' offered a rare insight into the predicament of Palestinian refugees, living not in the West Bank or Gaza, but in the Arab world. The detailed report by Judith Miller and David Samuels exposed the often appalling treatment meted out to an estimated 4.6 million Palestinians by their Arab hosts over the last sixty years, particularly in Lebanon, Syria, Iraq and Kuwait. The picture painted is one of exclusion, discrimination, degradation, and expulsion at the hands of the same governments who publicly condemn Israel for its conduct regarding the Palestinians. Far from supporting Israel's policies, the report focuses on exposing the 'cynical but time-honoured practice in Middle Eastern politics: the statesmen who decry the political and humanitarian crisis of the approximately 3.9 million Palestinians in the Israeli-occupied West Bank and in Gaza ignore the plight of an estimated 4.6 million Palestinians who live in Arab countries.' It accuses Arab countries of treating Palestinians 'as unwanted guests or as tools to be used in pursuing wider political interests - but rarely as fully-fledged members of society.' Key examples of discrimination by Arab regimes against Palestinians in the report include: · 250,000 Palestinians expelled from Kuwait following Yasser Arafat's support for Saddam Hussein in the Gulf War in 1991 · Tens of thousands of Palestinians dispossessed following the second Iraq war in 2003 · Palestinians in Lebanon in 'catastrophic' situation and stripped of the right to own property and banned from 20 professions · Palestinians in Syria denied the right to vote, stand for political office or purchase farmland Click here to continue reading. The role of journalists in relating international law to news audiences How well do journalists report international law issues? Are news audiences sufficiently aware of how contested terms like 'occupation' and 'disproportionate' are among lawyers? This week, Just Journalism released a detailed event summary of a recent roundtable discussion it convened on the subject of how international law is reported by the media. High profile journalists, media academics and legal specialists met at Portcullis House to discuss and debate how British journalists do and should address legal terms like 'war crimes', 'genocide' and 'proportionality' when reporting world conflicts. Click here for full document. Key observations include: · International law is a highly politicised subject, with conflicting parties utilising its language to tarnish their opponents. The media plays a crucial role in disseminating claims and counter-claims in the Middle East, Sri Lanka and elsewhere · International legal concepts such as 'occupation' and 'disproportionate' are highly contested but not always reported as such; there is less consensus within the legal community than journalists often communicate · The liberal view of international law dominates public perceptions despite the fact that international law often legitimises war; the media perpetuates rather than challenges the liberal view · Journalists unqualified in law may not have sufficient subject knowledge to adjudicate between the conflicting opinions they solicit from legal experts, directly impacting the level of understanding by the public Participants at the event were: Daniel Johnson, Editor, Standpoint (Chair) Elizabeth Samson, Visiting Fellow, Hudson Institute (Guest speaker) Anthony Borden, Executive Director, Institute for War and Peace Reporting Nick Donovan, Head of Campaigns, Policy and Research, Aegis Trust Dr Suzanne Franks, Director of Research, Centre for Journalism, University of Kent Jonathan Marcus, Diplomatic Correspondent, BBC World Service Prof Robert McCorquodale, Director, British Institute of International and Comparative Law Douglas Murray, Director, Centre for Social Cohesion Prof Jean Seaton, Professor of Media History, Westminster University Prof Jon Silverman, Professor of Media and Criminal Justice, University of Bedfordshire Dr Ralph Wilde, Reader in Laws and Vice Dean for Research at UCL For more information or to contact us, please visit www.justjournalism.com Just Journalism does not endorse the views and opinions presented in the articles, documentaries and programmes referred to above.