After
you read this article about Al Jazeera and how the NY Times seems to
think that they offer "balanced" news in the mideast, you can see why
the Times would publish National Security secrets that have been leaked
to it. Some that I know believe whatever this "paper of record"
print. They can give their opinion on the editorial page but the Times
will slant the news article to fit their preconceived notions of how
the story should read.
On Feb. 16, the New York Times
ran a highly sympathetic profile of Al Jazeera, the Qatar-based media
outlet that became well-known in the West by broadcasting taped
statements by Osama bin Laden. (This article was also published in the
Times-owned International Herald Tribune.) Under
a headline declaring that Al Jazeera produces "Balanced Coverage," the
Times article is filled with flattering quotes on Al Jazeera's effort
to supply "comprehensive and accurate" news coverage, its lack of
"ideological aim," and noble goal to "bridge the gap" between East and
West. An Al Jazeera spokesman argues that since the station is
criticized by both the Pentagon and
Arab regimes, this "is a sign that what we are doing is right." The
Times article supports that view ? failing to cite any of the myriad
examples of anti-Israel, anti-Semitic, and anti-Western material that
characterize Al Jazeera coverage.
Consider:
? The Al Jazeera website has a special section on the Israeli/Palestinian conflict, which amounts to a slick
ideological assault against Israel and the facts. Among the countless examples: President Bush has given Ariel Sharon a "licence to kill" to eradicate "Palestinian nationalism," suicide terrorists are euphemized as "self-sacrificing fighters," and a review of "massacres"
in the Arab-Israeli conflict contains only examples of Israeli acts,
with no Arab acts mentioned. This is what the Times calls "balanced
coverage"?
? Far from "neutral," Al Jazeera journalists actively supported
anti-American forces in Iraq: In November, US Defense Secretary Rumsfeld announced evidence that Al-Jazeera
and another Arab media outlet cooperated with Iraqi forces to witness
and videotape attacks on American troops. Al Jazeera's presentation
of Americans as barbaric, and Saddam Hussein's regime as heroic, were
so outlandish that when Hussein was captured in a hole, an Egyptian government official said, "We
discovered that all what the [Iraqi] information minister was saying
was all lies... Now no one believes Al-Jazeera anymore." No one except the New York Times, that is.
As journalist and commentator Tom Gross
says, "This New York Times story is an example of how the paper,
through the myth of 'objectivity,' subtly misleads its readers on
Mideast issues on an almost daily basis." Al Jazeera, with 35 million
daily viewers and plans to enter North American cable, is a growing
force in propagating anti-Israel and anti-American lies under the guise
of objective "news." New York Times readers, unfortunately, are left in
the dark regarding this aspect of the "balanced" Arab media outlet.