If you don't feel like clicking on the link above, here's a summary: During a story about "Syria and the Middle East," CNN used a map of the Middle East that did not show Israel. Instead, the area was designated "Palestina." Here's the map in question:
So, as Jews who have endured decades of cries that Israel has no right to exist, this should rightly concern us. What happened? How could CNN let this happen? Luckily, we have Honest Reporting here to help us out. But almost immediately the article uses some language I think we should question.
- "CNN Erases Israel From the Map" (This is the headline)
- "Israel has been wiped from the map..."
- "Whether it was an oversight or something more sinister, CNN's illustration of the Middle East without Israel is completely unacceptable."
Honest Reporting uses the phrases "wiped/erases from the map." This is a very charged phrase, and I don't think it should have been used by a website attempting to fix media bias (unless quoting someone else, of course). It only inflames its readers.
The idea that if "it was an oversight or something more sinister" should not be brushed aside so casually. If CNN's choice of map was an accidental oversight, that completely changes the nature of the error. But, as it stands, either CNN is part of a conspiracy, or even its forgetfulness is somehow malicious. CNN cannot come out clean.
Let's back up a bit. Maybe I'm being too harsh. After all, Honest Reporting is a website that seeks to "Defend Israel from Media Bias." It makes money on clicks. All well and good. Publications that can attract many readers deserve to be profitable, right?
But Honest Reporting does not make a habit of posting times when news organizations do a good job (because that's not interesting, thus fewer clicks), and when it finds errors it admits might have been a mistake (such as here), it resorts to inflammatory language to ensure readers are outraged (and thus causing them to share the story, thus garnering Honest Reporting more clicks, and more money). Honest Reporting's business model is based on making it's readers angry (Or, more generally, emotional).
Here, let me get my soap box for one of my favorite phrases: NOT EVERYONE CARES ABOUT ISRAEL AS MUCH AS WE DO. Not everyone even cares at all. Not because they are anti-Israel - they just have other things to care about. South Sudan seceded from Sudan during a civil war. Did you know that? What are your opinions on this? You probably have none, because you don't have family there, or a trace your heritage there, or whatever. That's totally fine. That doesn't make you anti-South Sudan. It just means it isn't important to you. If you used a map of Africa that didn't show South Sudan, you aren't anti-South Sudan. You just didn't notice it because you didn't care (Google Map of Africa. South Sudan is not on every map shown).
Did Honest Reporting send an email to CNN alerting them of their error? Or did Honest Reporting post a story on its website, insinuate CNN was part of something sinister, and share it with its followers before giving CNN a chance to react? If Honest Reporting was truly against media bias, it would have contacted CNN privately and waited 12-24 hours for a response. If there was none, run the story as is. They then at least could have said "CNN has ignored our attempts to reach out to them." If CNN fixed it but gave no written response back, or a lackluster one, then write a story that it happened, that it got fixed, but you aren't sure what happened behind the scenes. Or, if CNN said "Oh you're right, our bad, someone wasn't paying attention," Then don't publish a story, because that isn't media bias. That's just incompetence. But that isn't Honest Reporting's purpose. They aren't here to get rid of media bias. They're here to make you angry about it. Because then you share their stories. And then they get clicks.
It's also important to note that CNN has since fixed this error (By replacing the map with a picture of a bombed out building in Aleppo, which in truth doesn't actually address the error, itself), but the Honest Reporting article has not been rescinded. There is a note above the article saying it was fixed, but the story itself is still entirely intact. This is because, and I cannot stress this enough, Honest Reporting wants clicks more than it wants to end media bias. Because getting clicks is how it gets paid.
(I have reached out both to CNN and Honest Reporting with questions for them and, if they respond, I will update this post accordingly. As of 6/12/16, neither have responded.)
No comments:
Post a Comment