Listener Sarah in Atlanta wrote in about a piece from The Guardian:
“Because of the source, I automatically do not believe this. Though I would have discounted Abu Ghraib reports and certainly some of that was real. I’m curious if you have any insights to share to help make sense of this. Or even how much if this is remotely true. Loving the podcast and continuing to share!”
Sarah’s right to be wary. I’ve discussed The Guardian’s journalistic fiascoes in previous episodes and newsletters.
Her question offers a helpful learning opportunity. So in the latest episode, I dig in.
The ‘lede’
The Guardian’s story proves its bias in the first sentence (which is, perhaps pretentiously, referred to as a “lede” in the news world). Here’s how the story begins:
See what’s missing? Any source or admission that the news agency does not know whether this is true. Right out of the gate, the story treats one person’s claims as fact. It continues with this throughout the entire piece. The words “alleged” or “claim” never appear.
This isn’t journalism; it’s propaganda.
Citing B’Tselem
At one point, the article finally refers to “his description of his time in prison.” Even that sentence does not acknowledge that they can’t confirm or corroborate any of his claims. The Guardian calls his description “a part of what the Israeli human rights group B’Tselem says is a policy of abuse towards Palestinians detainees in Israeli prisons and detention centres.”
News sites love to cite B’Tselem. To them, it’s the ultimate way of pinning their bias on an “Israeli human rights group.” But B’Tselem is not a trustworthy source; it’s a far-left NGO with a long history of lies, distortions and antisemitic rhetoric. The media never looks into this and willfully ignores proof because it wants to believe everything bad that B’Tselem says. Learn more from NGO Monitor and Honest Reporting.
Trusting B’Tselem on Israel’s history or current events is like trusting Kanye on Black American history or current events.
Context erased
The story also ignores who the so-called “freed Palestinians” include — some of the world’s worst people:
There were also, of course, detainees who have not been charged. This is normal during war. By refusing to tell readers that, it pretends Israel is engaged in a uniquely evil practice. Gaza started this war, so of course there are Gazan detainees. The Guardian refers to this one as a “government employee,” without telling you what that means: He is part of Hamas.
And, perhaps most important of all, The Guardian leaves out the biggest reason to be suspicious. From this episode:
In Palestinian culture, it’s standard operating procedure, — it’s the M.O. — when you have been held by any Israeli forces for any block of time, you immediately complain that you were tortured. They know that the media will say it’s true and the world will believe them.
Any country can mistreat prisoners. It’s absolutely possible that some of these detainees were mistreated. But in democracies, like Israel, the people and their elected representatives can demand access to prisons and detention centers — which Israelis do. (Unlike Abu Ghraib, the notorious U.S.-run prison in Iraq, the one discussed in The Guardian is on domestic soil, inside Israel.)
That’s not the case anywhere else in MENA. If only The Guardian cared.
Supporters: Keep the questions and feedback coming! You determine so much of what I discuss on the show and in the newsletter. 👊
JL
P.S. On Instagram? Let’s meet up there.
Perfect example of: Ask, and ye shall receive! Send requests, feedback, etc. 👊🏻♥️