 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Protesting the Washington Post's double standards
To: Mr.
Michael Getler
Ombudsman
The Washington Post
1150 15th Street
NW Washington, D.C. 20071
(202) 334-7582
June 10, 2002
Dear Mr. Getler,
We, the undersigned, hereby request that the Washington Post address our concerns (see items 1 and 2 below) regarding its news coverage of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict.
We have tried for nearly two years to attract your attention on this matter, but to no avail. We have published reports and empirical studies on your paper's coverage of the conflict, have telephoned you dozens of times to discuss our concerns, and have sent thousands of letters for your consideration (a sample of which can be found at: letters to the Washington Post).
And yet, you have managed to ignore our concerns and have failed to address them in any meaningful way. We have taken note of your June 9, 2002, column, where you at long last mention some of those concerns. But a brief mention is hardly adequate, when the charges lodged against the Post are supported by two years of empirical evidence. Indeed, the column was the sixth in a series of pieces from you focusing mainly on pro-Israeli accusations against the Washington Post, and your response to us was clearly an attempt from you to show that the Post is being criticized from both sides rather than an answer to our concerns in their own right.
We are well aware of your professional advice to readers and critics of the Post's Mideast coverage, asking such parties to examine the paper's coverage over time and cautioning against making judgments based on a single news article or one week's worth of news stories. Our analyses have consistently followed that advice, tracking over a period of 20 months the Post's use of highly subjective terms such as "terrorist" or "retaliation" and documenting a clear pattern of bias.
Our request of you is simple and reasonable. We request a published response, in your capacity as the Washington Post's ombudsman, that clarifies the Post's official policy regarding your highly selective use of words such as "retaliation" and "terrorist" in news coverage, and addresses the following double standards in your news coverage:
(1) Why has the Washington Post consistently framed the conflict as one in which Palestinians always "attack," while Israel invariably "retaliates"? [ read more ] [ pdf format ]
(2) Why are Palestinians who intentionally target and kill Israeli civilians always described as "terrorists" or people engaged in acts of "terror", while Israeli civilians and settlers who do the same are labeled only as "vigilantes" - even in the astonishing case of West Bank settlers who murdered a Palestinian family including a three-month-old infant? [ read more ] [pdf format]
Your answer to our questions is kindly requested.
If you wish to discuss
the matter further, please contact Dr.
Ahmed Bouzid, President, Palestine Media Watch, at:
(610) 993 - 0608 - pmwatch@zworg.com
Yours,
