Journalism.co.uk Editors' Blog » Israel

csmonitor.com: Israeli officials seek Swedish government condemnation of organ theft story

Judith Townend — Tue, 25 Aug 2009 08:44:30 +0000

Christian Science Monitor reports on the ‘blood libel’ charge made by Israeli politicians and journalists against a Swedish daily newspaper, Aftonbladet.

“In the view from Jerusalem, the answer to the controversy is simple: the Swedish government should condemn Aftonbladet, the tabloid which last week printed an article suggesting that Israel snatched the organs of Palestinians who died in their custody.

“In the view from Stockholm, the answer is equally simple: Israel should accept that in a democracy, newspapers are free to print what they wish, and that it isn’t the place of governments to interfere.”

Full post at this link…

Similar Posts:

Going it alone: Al Jazeera’s Gaza correspondents live interview FRIDAY 2pm (GMT+1)

Judith Townend — Fri, 24 Apr 2009 09:00:08 +0000

What happens when you find yourself as the only English-language television broadcaster at a breaking news scene?

What happens when that breaking news scene is a major war in the middle east?

That’s exactly what happened for Al Jazeera journalists Sherine Tadros and Ayman Mohyeldin earlier this year when Al Jazeera English found itself the only major English television broadcaster allowed inside Gaza.

Al Jazeera Gaza Correspondents: ‘Going it Alone’

A 12-day ban prevented other Western media networks entering the area – although the BBC used two producers already on the ground. Read this post by the POLIS researcher Nina Bigalke, on Charlie Beckett’s blog, for a fuller context. “If 12 hours are a very long time in the world of journalism, 12 days seem like an eternity,” Bigalke writes.

Journalism.co.uk first met Tadros and Mohyeldin, who reported from Gaza throughout the conflict, in February:

“To be the only English channel on the ground could be a ‘one-off experience’ during her career, [Tadros] said. While she thrived on being part of the only English-language media team on the ground – ‘everything we did was exclusive’ – Tadros was aware of the responsibility to cover as much as possible for an English speaking audience.”

Now it’s your chance to join in and put your questions to the pair. Visit this site at 2pm (GMT +1). Journalism.co.uk will be putting a series of questions, via CoverItLive, to Tadros and Mohyeldin about their experience. Was it liberating to find themselves without the BBC working alongside? Was it a daunting responsibility?

Leave your own questions in the comments below this post and they will be included in the interview. See you at 2pm (4pm Doha time). You can also submit questions to @journalism_live on Twitter.

UPDATE 15.00 BST: THIS EVENT HAS NOW FINISHED. Thank you for your questions and thoughts. Please leave additional comments on the subject of media coverage in Gaza below this post. If you participated and wish to comment on the use of CoverItLive in this format please send your feedback to judith at journalism.co.uk. Did it seem a good way to present an interview? Was the balance of questions between Journalism.co.uk and users about right? Many thanks in advance for your help.

Similar Posts:

Live stream from Gaza hosted on Ustream

Judith Townend — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 11:32:16 +0000

This live stream ‘Live Gaza Action’, hosted on Ustream, is fast attracting attention and comments (hat tip: Al Jazeera’s head of new media, Mohamed Nanabha, @mohamed via Twitter).

According to the stream’s description, the stream is coming from Ramattan and NanaLive, ‘a Gaza news camera contractor and a Israeli news organization respectively.’

“It seems there are large blocks of Live stream of the war zone, but you’ll also see commercials and news commentary like any normal news organization,” the description says.

The stream is embedded here, but follow this link to follow the fast-paced comments alongside the live stream.

Free TV Show from Ustream

Similar Posts:

Media Culpa: Swedish blogger fired for pro-Israeli blog gets 32 months salary plus damages

Judith Townend — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 10:45:32 +0000

Media Culpa reports that a man employed at the Swedish Migration Board since the 1980s has been fired for running a outspoken blog about the conflict between Israel and Palestine – but has received 32 months salary plus damages, totalling 1.3 million Swedish Krona, or US$165,000. Full story...

Similar Posts:

Editor&Publisher (AP): Joe the Plumber turns war correspondent?

Judith Townend — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 09:06:17 +0000

AP reports that Joe the Plummer, the man from Ohio who became a ‘household name’ during the US presidential campaign, says he is heading to Israel as a war correspondent for the conservative Web site pjtv.com. Full story…

Similar Posts:

Editor&Publisher: Letters to E&P on media coverage of Israel and Gaza

Laura Oliver — Mon, 05 Jan 2009 09:24:21 +0000

Was there a 'veil of silence' over international media when it came to covering the buildup up to Israel's recent invasion of Gaza or has coverage been biased in favour of Palestine, readers' letters to E&P ask.

Reuters ‘dissatisfied’ by investigation into death of Fadel Shana

Laura Oliver — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 13:01:35 +0000

Reuters has said it is ‘disappointed with and dissatisfied by’ an investigation by the Israeli military into the death of its cameraman Fadel Shana.

The Israeli tank crew who killed Shana in the Gaza Strip four months ago will not face legal action as a result of the investigation.

Troops could not determine whether Shana, who had covered events in Gaza for Reuters for three years, was carrying a camera or a weapon, but were ‘nonetheless justified’ in firing the shell, a letter from Israel’s senior military advocate-general to the news agency said.

“I’m extremely disappointed that this report condones a disproportionate use of deadly force in a situation the army itself admitted had not been analysed clearly. They would appear to take the view that any raising of a camera into position could garner a deadly response,” said David Schlesinger, Reuters editor-in-chief, in a press statement.

Reuters has responded to the findings with a letter to the IDF (Israel Defense Forces) asking why the tank crew did not attempt to find out if Shana was a cameraman as his blue flak jacket marked ‘PRESS’ suggested.

According to the army, the troops could not see this sign.

“These findings mean that a journalist with a camera is at risk of coming under fire and there’s not that much that can be done. That’s unacceptable. It’s difficult to believe (…) that the IDF took the necessary precautions to avoid causing harm to civilians – as it is obliged to do under international law,” said Joel Campagna from the Committee to Protect Journalists.

The video from Reuters below shows the last seconds of footage shot by Shana before his death:

Similar Posts:

Guardian removes suicide bomb video after 550 complaints

Laura Oliver — Mon, 18 Feb 2008 11:14:35 +0000

The Guardian has removed a video from its website showing a suicide bomb attack in Israel after more than 550 complaints were made about the footage.

The piece, which was selected from a package of footage and text supplied to the paper by Reuters, showed the wounded being taken to hospital, as well as statements from the Palestinian agriculture minister and a Hamas spokesman. It was removed four days after being posted to the site.

Writing about the decision to remove the video from the site, Siobhain Butterworth, readers’ editor, says most traffic to the video came from the site Honest Reporting, which criticised the lack of an Israeli spokesperson in the footage.

In response Butterworth points out that at the time no Israeli sources featured in the Reuters package.

She also directs complainants, readers and Honest Reporting to the paper’s other online coverage of the event:

“Honest Reporting linked only to the video; it ignored the rest of the Guardian’s coverage. It didn’t mention that the story published on the day of the bombing (and which the video accompanied) began with comments from the Israeli prime minister and included statements from an eyewitness, a doctor at the scene and a police spokesman. Stories about the event in the following days also included statements from Israeli sources.”

However, with regards to the video in question, Butterworth admits there was ‘an editing error’, which may have lead to a perceived Palestinian bias. While this was the reason the piece was removed, this was not ‘a deliberate attempt to give a one-sided response to the event’, she adds.

Similar Posts: