& Cozy Corner: Media Archives

Main

September 12, 2006

Life expectancies

Steve Sernberg over at USA Today demonstrates his "grasp" of the English language:

America is a nation divided by vast differences in life expectancy, a "longevity gap" that can't be readily explained by race, income or access to health care, a study reported Monday.

Got that, right? Can't be explained by those factors? Read on:
They found that life expectancy differences are driven mainly by chronic diseases in young and middle-aged adults.
...
The longest living group, "America One," consists of 10.4 million Asians, with an average life expectancy of 85....That's 27 years longer than the average 58-year life expectancy of Native Americans in South Dakota.
...
The second group, "America Two," indicates that income isn't the key to a longer life span. This group is made up of 3.6 million low-income whites living in Minnesota, the Dakotas, Iowa, Montana and Nebraska, with an average life expectancy of 79.
...
The 214 million people in "America Three," the bulk of the population, have an average life expectancy of 78. Next, in rank order, come poor whites in Appalachia and the Mississippi Valley with an average life expectancy of 75, Western Native Americans, who live to an average of 73, and black middle America, also 73. Low-income Southern rural blacks and high-risk urban blacks, "Americas Seven and Eight," live to 71.

Every grouping he lists is identified by race or economics. I think he isn't able to have one sentence which says, "If you're Native American or black, your life expectancy is shorter than if you're white or Asian." Oh wait, he could have said that. But this is the point that closes out his story, which is his real problem:

Jonathan Skinner of Dartmouth says much of the variation depends on such individual factors as diet, exercise and smoking, not health care. "Yet we spend much of our attention and 16% of our national income on health care," Skinner says. "There's no way that differences in the quality of health care can explain 20-year gaps in life expectancy."

Ooooh, so is the subtext of this article that different racial groupings tend to make different choices in the three controllable areas that most impact their longevity? That's not a news story I'd expect to see.

Posted by Andy at 07:08 AM | | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

September 09, 2006

When 'Fake but Accurate' is acceptable

Forkum reveals a useful insight into when 'fake but accurate' is an acceptable standard in referring to the Path to 9/11 ABC movie:

I can't comment on the movie, but if it's essentially accurate in the required summation and fictionalization of events, then the movie should stand whether the particulars match history or not. "Fake but accurate" is not an acceptable standard for journalism, but it is absolutely necessary for art. And this is a movie not a documentary.

Sadly, I think a lot of people won't get this. In telling a story, you may combine a string of boring notes and meetings into one scene which captures the essence of the underlying narrative. In telling the news, you can't make up a scene, and then argue that it is capturing what you "know is true" - either you tell it like it is, or you don't tell it at all.

Posted by Andy at 10:22 AM | | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

August 25, 2006

A little interview

The Gaming Blog has an interview between the BBC and a Lebanese. Enjoy it, and Shabbat Shalom!

Posted by Andy at 05:15 PM | | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

August 23, 2006

Now that's a headline!

Indefinite jail sentence for vicious, woman-hating rapist:

A man with an implicit hatred of women has been jailed indefinitely for the brutal rape of a 17-year-old virgin - although he claims not to remember committing the crime.

Note: Apparently, indefinitely doesn't mean forever:
He was given an indeterminate sentence by the judge last Friday at Inner London Crown Court, which means that Trotter will only be released from Brixton Prison once the parole board are satisfied that he is not a threat to the public.

He can only apply for release after serving at least five years in prison and he will be put on licence for at least 10 years after he leaves.

But nonetheless, this is the kind of truth in reporting I like to see. Had it been the Boston Globe, the sentence would have been something like, "Alcoholic sentenced to life in prison."

Posted by Andy at 09:58 PM | | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

August 22, 2006

Brian Williams pretends to not be The Man

Brian Williams on NBC Nightly News just now:

This next item is for all those who quietly suffer at the gas pump every day across this country watching those numbers fly by. The scene was the Charles St. Stop and Go in Rockford Illinois. The time was yesterday morning. The price at the pump for medium grade unleaded - three dollars nine cents a gallon. But then, a computer glitch somehow moved the decimal point on the price one place to the left. That turned the three dollar gas into thirty cent gas. The attendant noticed something might be wrong when a huge line formed outside the gas station. The pumps were quickly shut down amid fears that oil company profits might plummet. But for one brief shining moment, we the consumers won. It was like the old days, before you needed to refinance your home to fill your tank.

Okay, I could just tear this to shreds, but let me just put it this way: Brian, the clerks shut it down amid fears that they wouldn't have a paycheck since they'd just wiped out the margin for that gas station. They still have to pay the state the nineteen cents a gallon state tax, and still have to buy the fuel to replace it. No, Brian, they weren't worried about the oil companies, they were worried about their livelihoods.

Posted by Andy at 06:56 PM | | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

August 21, 2006

More photostaging

Rob Port points us at this BBC coverage of the return to Bint Jbeil:


When Um Ali Mihdi returned to her home in the southern Lebanese city of Bint Jbeil two days ago, she found a 1,000lb (450kg) Israeli bomb lying unexploded in her living room.

The shell is huge, bigger than the young boy pushed forward to stand reluctantly next to it while we get our cameras out and record the scene for posterity.

So the scene that the BBC was recording for posterity was endangering a child by shoving them next to an unexploded ordinance which could detonate at any minute? Hmmm, wouldn't that be a violation of any one of a number of international laws?

Posted by Andy at 11:45 PM | | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

August 16, 2006

The Sun learns from AP

Normally, I wouldn't even note a flap up between the UK royals and their media, but this is time relevant:

Lurid photographs of Prince Harry in a distinctly friendly embrace with a television presenter were at the centre of a new row between the tabloid press and the Royal Family yesterday.
...
But the newspaper was humiliatingly forced to eat its words last night after Clarence House pointed out that the pictures were taken three years ago.

Has the Sun hired Adnan Hajj?

Posted by Andy at 10:09 AM | | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

August 15, 2006

Hizb'dollie

Did you know that AP/Hizb'allah has an evacuation and return service just for dolls?.

Posted by Andy at 08:43 AM | | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

August 13, 2006

Operation Zionist Scapegoat, Phase III

Operation Zionist ScapeGoat Facility bombed! Confederate Yankee has the scoop:

Lebanese civil defense rescuers, try to remove two blanket-wrapped bodies, found trapped under debris and concrete of the destroyed buildings, attacked late Monday by Israeli airstrike, in the southern Beirut suburb of Chiah, Lebanon, Tuesday Aug. 8, 2006. The raid on the Muslim southern suburb next to a Christian neighborhood killed at least 15 people, police officials said. (AP Photo/Hussein Malla)

The bodies were found already wrapped in blankets under the debris of the building.

I'm trying to think of rational reasons that Lebanese would keep pre-packaged corpses in their homes, and I'm coming up with nothing. Nada. Zip.

One irrational explanation is that some bodies are being saved by Hezbollah to use in photo ops at a later date, and that the Hezbollah Body Shop (for lack of a better term) got hit, and buried those that should already have been buried.

Apparently, no one has notified Confederate Yankee of the internal operations of Operation Zionist Scapegoat. Phase 3 was planned for Chiah; unfortunately, the operatives tasked with positioning and unwrapping the bodies were detained by the despicable "Muslims for Moses" proselytization group. Rumors of an internal reorganization of the OZS field office are denied with no comment by Hizb'allah press agent Lin Noueihid.

Posted by Andy at 05:21 PM | | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

August 12, 2006

The business of video

Imagine, if you will, that you're a business owner. You sell the parts that are used to make widgets. You do this because all of the widget manufacturers realized it was more economical to buy from you, than to scour the world for all the little components of widgets. You have a good business; since widget parts are a renewable resource. You can get them almost anywhere in the world; and, in fact, this is good, because consumers of widgets often want exotic widgets.

Along comes a cartel, who contracts with you to produce widgets for them. That is, unlike the rest of your customers, they don't want a wide range of widget parts, they want actual widgets. But they have very specific demands for their widgets. None of the widget parts can be of a certain color, for instance. And they're going to pay you a lot of money. In fact, they get grumpy about any widgets having parts of that color, too. They'd like to know that you will try not to distribute widget parts of that color at all.

Sounds plausible, right? In fact, anyone who does business with a European multinational firm - like Ikea or Nokia - know that they enforce their philosophy of ethical business this way. But did you know that the Associate Press Television works this way? And that the preferential customers are a cartel of anti-Israel nations?

Posted by Andy at 08:39 AM | | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

August 11, 2006

Please, can I have another?

Why am I not surprised that the NY Times reports:

Israel has asked the Bush administration to speed delivery of short-range antipersonnel rockets armed with cluster munitions, the New York Times reported Friday morning. These rockets can be effective against hidden missile launchers.
...
But the Times reports that some State Department officials "have sought to delay the approval because of concerns over the likelihood of civilian casualties, and the diplomatic repercussions." The rockets, the officials told the Times, are fired by the dozen and could be expected to cause civilian casualties if used against targets in populated areas.

Hmmm, the New York Times. And the State Department. Maybe Laurence Simon can start running some form of "leaker bingo."

Posted by Andy at 01:58 PM | | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

August 08, 2006

Media screwup of the day

Apparently, the Washington Post is tired of Reuters getting all the airtime. One of their reporters goes out on a limb. The short version:

Sunday: Analysts tell me Israel is intentionally leaving rocket sites so that they have an excuse to wage war.

Monday: Those analysts ripped me a new one; they were talking in hypotheticals about various possible strategies, and did not say that Israel was doing that, only that it would be a plausible strategy.

Hmmm, I wonder how many of the other things that reporters have told us, citing unnamed sources, were simply speculation? And, unfortunately, Sunday's interview was on CNN's Reliable Sources, while Monday's was on Hugh Hewitt's show. So everyone, prepare to hear that Israel is intentionally letting rockets land in Israel whenever you engage with folks only peripherally paying attention; I think we've just seen the birth of a KnownFact.

Posted by Andy at 06:58 AM | | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

August 06, 2006

Even I'm better with Photoshop than this...

Will the Reuters photoscam undo someone's career in the same way the bogus CBS memos did? Probably not, but it helps demonstrate the lack of integrity that a lot (but hopefully, not all) of MidEast stringers and staff photographers have.

Little Green Footballs has the story.

Continue reading "Even I'm better with Photoshop than this..." »

Posted by Andy at 09:54 AM | | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Gibson v. Haq

Jeff Jacoby notes an interesting comparison:

In the first six days after his arrest, the media database Nexis logged 888 stories mentioning ``Mel Gibson" and ``Jews." And that didn't include the countless websites, talk shows, and smaller publications that also took it up.
...
According to police and eyewitness reports, the killer forced his way into the offices of the Jewish Federation of Greater Seattle by holding a gun to the head of a 13-year-old girl. Once inside, Naveed Haq announced, ``I am a Muslim American, angry at Israel," and opened fire with two semiautomatic pistols. Pam Waechter died on the spot; five other women were shot in the abdomen, knee, or arm. When one of the women managed to call 911, Haq took the phone and told the dispatcher: ``These are Jews and I'm tired of getting pushed around and our people getting pushed around by the situation in the Middle East."
At a time when jihadist murder is a global threat and some of the most malevolent figures in the Islamic world -- Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Hezbollah chieftain Hassan Nasrallah, to name just two -- openly incite violence against Americans and Jews, the attack in Seattle should have been a huge story everywhere. Yet after six days, a Nexis search turned up only 236 stories mentioning Haq -- one-fourth the number dealing with Gibson's drunken outburst. Why the disparity?

Hmmm, I'll note that here at Cozy Corner, we've mentioned Mel Gibson in 4 posts, and the Seattle attack in 4 posts (although never mentioning Haq by name). So now we are 5 and 5.

But I think that, in addition to Gibson's fame, there is a deeper, underlying reason. Fundamentally, Gibson's story is a good Christian parable. Devout man gets drunk, says shameful things, apologizes for them, time for healing and forgiveness (and the cover of the Weekly World News, People, and your local rag). People don't have to feel bad about themselves, although if they harbor any of Mel's deep-seated anxieties, now they can empathize with him. Haq's story? Haq's breaks the multicultural, moral relativism worldview of mainstream America media, because Sudden Jihad Syndrome has no place in a world in which Evil dare not exist.

In short: Mel is a bad man, and we understand that. Haq is an evil man, and we don't/

Posted by Andy at 03:33 AM | | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

August 05, 2006

You first!

Apparently, France and the US have reached a compromise to enforce on Israel and Hizb'allah:

The draft, obtained by The Associated Press, "calls for a full cessation of hostilities based upon, in particular, the immediate cessation by Hezbollah of all attacks and the immediate cessation by Israel of all offensive military operations."

That language would be a major victory for Israel, which has insisted it must have the right to respond if Hezbollah launches missiles against it. France and many other nations had demanded an immediate halt to violence without conditions as a way to push the region back toward stability.

Wow! It's a major victory that a cessation in hostiliites requires the aggressor to stop shooting, too?

The resolution asks that Israel and Lebanon agree to a set of principles to achieve a long-term peace. One crucial element is an arms embargo that would block any entity except the Lebanese government from buying weapons.

Wait a second. I thought that Lebanon wasn't at war with Israel? Isn't that what the Lebanese keep telling everyone? "This isn't our war, it's those wacky militants in the south, who have nothing to do with us, except seats in our parliament, and better equipment than our military!"

Other principles spelled out in the resolution include the disarmament of Hezbollah; the creation of a buffer zone from the U.N.-demarcated border between Israel and Lebanon north to the Litani River; and the delineation of Lebanon's borders, especially in the disputed Chebaa Farms area.

The border was already delineated in 2000, folks. How is this a victory for anyone but Hizb'allah?

The resolution would call for the current U.N. force in Lebanon, known by its acronym UNIFIL, to monitor the cessation in fighting. Once Israel and Lebanon have agreed to the series of principles, the Security Council would then authorize a new peacekeeping force for the region.

Because UNIFIL has such a track record of history?

Any deal will have to gain the acceptance of both Israel and Hezbollah, which could prove difficult.

Umm, I thought it was Lebanon a few paragraphs ago? I see - are we now admitting that Hizb'allah has veto authority over the Lebanese government?

Israel says it wants to continue fighting for up to two weeks to seriously diminish Hezbollah's military capability; Hezbollah's chief spokesman said Thursday the militia will not agree to a cease-fire until all Israeli troops leave Lebanon.

Does that include the two you are holding?

Posted by Andy at 01:59 PM | | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

August 02, 2006

It's not the timestamps, folks

It's EU referendum vs. the Associated Press, Reuters and Agence France-Presse over the Qana photo shoot affair, with the Jerusalem Post reporting from the sidelines.

And hey, why shouldn't I add my own commentary?

One of the points that the AP spends most of its energy on is the timestamp argument:

The AP said information from its photo editors showed the events were not staged, and that the time stamps could be misleading for several reasons, including that web sites can use such stamps to show when pictures are posted, not taken. An AFP executive said he was stunned to be questioned about it. Reuters, in a statement, said it categorically rejects any such suggestion.

First off, I'm with Volokh:

I don't think the question of whether or not the photos were staged has any bearing on one's view of the Israel-Party of God conflict (even if they were actually faked, not just stage,that would be the least of Hezbollah's sins). It also doesn't change my view of the overall situation if 60 (original reports) 28 (more recent reports of how many bodies the Red Cross actually found there; of note that the reporters at the scene quoted the higher figure basd on pure hearsay;) or zero (conspiracy theorists) civilians were killed by an Israeli airstrike in Qana. So long as Israel has taken reasonable precautions to limit civilian casualties, as it has, the moral responsibility for any death lies with the Party of God for using Qana as a staging ground for attacks on Israel, knowing (far better than Israel) that civilians had remained in the village and were at risk. So why care if the photos were staged? Well, if that's your attitude, why not just have Oliver Stone recreate the scene and spread those photos around the international media?

That said, I can come up with any number of valid explanations for the timestamps being odd. Maybe the photographers did not have their cameras in the correct timezone; or the timezone was not synchronized with the computer they uploaded to. That accounts for the hour being wrong. And as anyone who uses a digital camera over time knows, the clocks will skew until you manually reset them (NTP doesn't work so well on a non-networked device); my wife and I run into this when we take pictures on vacation and try to create time-based slideshows. So really, those timestamps are irrelevant to the veracity of the "story."

The more damning evidence is the variety of poses and locations of Mr. Green Helmet and the bodies he carries; the precision of numbers that Hizb'allah asserted were in the building, even without bodies being found - while it is possible they had a good census, it may be that the bodies are still under the rubble - because they placed them there. And, lastly, even if this isn't a Pallywood event, the fault still lies with Hizb'allah for the deaths of the civilians. Never forget that.

And, for my last snark, quoting from AP:

"It's hard to imagine how someone sitting in an air-conditioned office or broadcast studio many thousands of miles from the scene can decide what occurred on the ground with any degree of accuracy," said Kathleen Carroll, AP's senior vice president and executive editor.

While I think a lot of people think Kathleen is pointing at all the bloggers criticizing the media, I disagree. She is actually agreeing with us. She is admitting that AP has absolutely no clue what's going on on the ground, but doesn't see that as her problem. That's where we disagree.

Posted by Andy at 11:43 AM | | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

August 01, 2006

Kudos to YnetNews

YnetNews provides coverage of the analysis of the questionable coverage of Qana:

A number of web logs in the United States and Britain have claimed that a man who appeared in much of the international press's coverage of the Qana bombing lifting children's bodies may have been a Hizbullah agent who staged photo-ops for the international media.

Now if only the The Times and Post would follow suit.

Hmm, does that make this a snark about the absence of coverage in the face of coverage of the analysis of the questionable coverage of Qana?

(hat tip: the everwatchful Dave at IsraellyCool).

Posted by Andy at 10:13 AM | | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Open letter to the Post and the Times

Ombudspersons (Deborah Howell, Byron Calame);

First, I will admit that most of my reading of your papers is to identify what I perceive as their bias against America, Israel, our national security efforts, and our economy. I'll except some of the guest editorials in the Post, as you do a better job of having selections that raise interesting and diverse points of view.

I'm sure by now you are aware of the events in Qana. I'm sure you're also aware - given Hizb'allah's notorious manipulation of the media; Hizb'allah's propensity for martyring the Lebanese in pursuit of their aims; the IDF's assertion that the building did not collapse when struck by their munitions; Hizb'allah's strategic positioning of assets in and around civilian structures; and images of alleged rescue workers and dead children with strange time discrepancies - that many of us who are following the attack on Israel and her war of self-defense closely question the "official" storyline. As fading bastions of investigative journalism, I would find it odd that your papers are *not* investigating these claims, were it not for my first paragraph.

My challenge to you - Investigate. Inform.


-Andy
http://www.cozikin.com/

Posted by Andy at 08:04 AM | | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (2)

July 30, 2006

Hizb'allah's deadliest kill yet

Sunday, Hizb'allah slaughtered 37 children in the village of Qana, in addition to a score of adults. Hizb'allah leader Nasrallah was not available for comment, as he was coordinating his next strikes with Syrian and Iranian government officials in Damascus, but a notional Hizb'allah operative gloated off camera, "We knew we could get the Israelis with this one! 50 of our own people! They are shahid to the cause! And many of them were handicapped, so we have killed two birds with one stone!"

For the past three days, Hizb'allah operatives in and around Qana have been playing a cat-and-mouse game, as operatives launch missiles at innocent civilians in towns and cities in sovereign Israel. With each launch, the IAF would target the launchers to protect their own civilians. Meanwhile, other operatives were collecting shahids. These innocent civilians were collected into one large building, "for their safety", and not provided information about Israeli warnings for innocent civilians to leave the village and head north for safety. Rumors that the civilians were held by force could not be substantiated at press time, as none of the shahid were available for comment.

Hizb'allah's public relations department is said to be pleased with their success, as the international media blames Israel for this latest of death of human shields. As hoped, The Jerusalem Post is comparing this to the shelling of Lebanese civilians at a UN outpost ten years ago in Qana. Israel's Prime Minister, Ehud Olmert, is apparently more resolute than Shimon Peres was a decade ago,

"I express deep regret, along with all of Israel and the IDF, for the civilian deaths in Qana. Nothing could be further from our intentions and our interests than harming civilians - everyone understands that. When we do harm civilians, the whole world recognizes that it is an exceptional case that does not characterize us. In contrast, Hizbullah has launched rockets with the aim of murdering innocent civilians in northern Israel."

In protest, the UN compound in Beirut came under attack from Lebanese rioters. It is not clear if the rioters were aware of the impotence of the UN.

Hamas also seized this opportunity, claiming that Qana would be the excuse for its attacks against Israel. An anonymous terrorist was overheard, "Whew! Now we have a good excuse for the next year or two of murders, bombings, and Qassam launches at women and children in Sderot! Because who knows when Israel will hand us another opportunity like this?"

***

Disclaimer: All quotes by terrorists are made up, and probably fictional. Death of innocents is truly heartbreaking, and while I denounce Hizb'allah for causing these deaths, my sympathy lies with the families of the deceased, and the IAF pilots involved.

Update [31 July 2006: 00:31 UTC-5]: The IDF asserts the building was destroyed by Hizb'allah. Wow. Apparently, I didn't go far enough on this one.

Posted by Andy at 10:08 AM | | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (4)

July 29, 2006

We don't know nothing!

This may or may not be in error:

The Syrian government has knowledge about the presence of al Qaeda cells in Lebanon and Syria and is prepared to share it with the United States, Sky News reported July 23, citing Syrian Cabinet minister Amr Salem. Such al Qaeda cells have grown since Syria withdrew its forces from Lebanon, he said. Salem added that Syria is also prepared to mediate discussions on Iraq between the United States and Iran.

But now, the People's Daily Online reports:
Syria categorically denied on Tuesday reports that it has information about the terrorist al- Qaida organization in Lebanon and that it is ready to offer them to Washington as "baseless".

The press office of Syran Ministry of Communication and Technology made the denial in a statement, the official SANA news agency reported.

The French AFP news agency carried a report by Britain's Sky News television on Sunday that Syria is prepared to tell the United States the whereabouts of al-Qaida cells in Lebanon.

They quoted Syrian Communication and Technology Minister Amr Salem as saying that "Syria has real hard knowledge."

The Syrian statement denied the reports, saying that "the news is categorically baseless and these issues have not been raised at all during the interview or in any talk of the minister with this news network or any media side."

The press office of the ministry has asked representative of the Sky News network about the subject and got an official statement that the al-Qaida issue was not part of the interview and the network did not say the minister has made such remarks, said the statement.

"Such lies and deviation are only to deform the honorable stances of Syria", it stressed.

Sky News' website is mum; even though they seem to be the root source of all of this. So either:

  • Several news agencies misquoted Sky News. Unlikely.

  • Sky News misquoted Amr Salem. Given that at least the Daily Telegraph has specific Amr Salem quotes, this is a bit doubtful, but a possibility.

  • Amr Salem exceeded his authority in disclosing this information. Possible, but I'm not sure that's the likelihood.

  • The Syrians used this venue to leak that al Qaeda is in Lebanon (like we didn't know that), either to warn the US against adventures in Beirut, or to warn the Lebanese to stay in line. We'll have to see what game they're playing, but I'm going to put my money on this one.

Posted by Andy at 11:42 AM | | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (1)

July 28, 2006

What's a little damage among friends?

SoccerDad asked for a compare and contrast of two articles. On one hand, we have Charles Krauthammer:

Had Israel wanted to destroy Lebanese civilian infrastructure, it would have turned out the lights in Beirut in the first hour of the war, destroying the billion-dollar power grid and setting back Lebanon 20 years. It did not do that. Instead, it attacked dual-use infrastructure -- bridges, roads, airport runways -- and blockaded Lebanon's ports to prevent the reinforcement and resupply of Hezbollah. Ten-thousand Katyusha rockets are enough. Israel was not going to allow Hezbollah 10,000 more.

And, on the other hand, we have Eugene Robinson:

The one thing that's clear so far is that Rice believes that allowing Israel to decimate Hezbollah and drive what's left of the group out of southern Lebanon is such a valuable step toward her "new" Middle East that it's worth crippling a nascent Arab democracy with hundreds of civilian casualties and billions of dollars worth of infrastructure damage.

The obvious contrast is, of course, that Krauthammer puts the damage in context - Israel is doing the bare minimum damage to achieve their means. Robinson doesn't bother. The telling quote, however, is one that SoccerDad left out from Robinson's article:

Rice's predecessors have all discovered that containment, incrementalism, trust-building and similar unglamorous, snail-paced measures are the worst way to handle the Middle East -- except for all the other conceivable ways.

In fact, Robinson is just plain wrong. Israel has a nice, quiet border with Jordan. A nice, quiet border with Egypt. By and large, a nice, quiet border with Syria. What do those three borders have in common? Oh, yeah - Israel kicked their teeth in. And when they came back for more, Israel did it again. And again. And again.

Now, the territories and Lebanon? That's where Israel has tried those unglamorous measures. And, let's see - attacks across her border. Her citizens killed. Her soldiers abducted.

And now, a lot of us think Israel needs to kick some teeth in. Because in the Middle East, power is respected. Diplomacy isn't.

Posted by Andy at 09:56 PM | | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

More media bias!

AbbaGav gets me thinking:

I recently took a stroll through Yahoo's Mideast Conflict News Photos, as is my wont when I'm looking for something easy to blog about -- if you have a blog that deals even remotely with media bias, you owe it to yourself to wade in there at least once a week because those posts practically write themselves.

And it made me think of this month's Time magazine. The cover story opens with three full page pictures, which I've attached below the fold. You tell me they aren't trying to spin a message?

Continue reading "More media bias!" »

Posted by Andy at 12:39 AM | | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

July 25, 2006

Reality, Truth, Bias, and Perception in the Media

SoccerDad gives us an assignment:

Critique "Two Views of the Same News Find Opposite Biases." I wrote a little about this yesterday and hope to write some more.

Let's start with Shankar Vedantam's argument:
In one especially telling experiment, researchers showed 144 observers six television news segments about Israel's 1982 war with Lebanon.

Pro-Arab viewers heard 42 references that painted Israel in a positive light and 26 references that painted Israel unfavorably.

Pro-Israeli viewers, who watched the very same clips, spotted 16 references that painted Israel positively and 57 references that painted Israel negatively.

The meat therefore seems to be: As long as partisans think we're biased against them from both sides, we're unbiased.

Let's look at that. Assume, if you will, a world in Cartesian space, where "reality" is the origin point (0,0). Everyone views reality through various filters, of course; applying their beliefs about how politics and economics work, who is evil, and who isn't, etc. Now assume two partisan observers. The first, we'll call Yitzhak. In Yitzhak's world, he is surrounded by enemies. These enemies will sacrifice their children to injure or kill Yitzhak's children. They've been at each other's throats for all of Yitzhak's life, and Yitzhak does not really believe that his opponents really want peace (sound familiar?). We're going to place Yitzhak's belief about reality at (-5,0).

Now, we posit a second observer, Ishmael. Ishmael believes that Yitzhak has no right to exist; that Yitzhak's grandfather displaced Ishmael's grandfather. Ishmael believes that the only peaceful solution requires a grace for Yitzhak, preferably on someone else's land far away. (Gee, can you see where my own bias is?). Ishmael's worldview thinks reality is somewhere around (45,0).

Along comes happy-fun-mainstream-media-reporter. HFMSMR is employed by mainstream-media-conglomerate, and MSMC wants a "balanced" view. After looking at both Yitzhak at (-5,0) and Ishmael at (45,0), HFMSMR decided that balance requires an article written at (25,0). After all, this is equidistant from the two partisans, right? To make this work, HFMSMR employs two tactics. First, he dehumanizes and decontextualizes anything in support of Yitzhak. For instance, attacks against Yitzhak's people might be called ineffective. Counterstrikes might only show collateral civilian damage, and not military targets hit. Second, he humanizes and sanitizes Ishmael's actions. The wounded and dead are used to lead into news stories. The war crimes are not discussed.

Now, we have a balanced article - if journalism were about finding common ground, and advocating that both sides have an equivalent viewpoint. And Ishmael comes along, and says, "What? You left out the part where Yitzhak's children shoot little puppies? How dare you!" And Yitzhak comes along and says, "What? How could you not point out that our killing of Ishmael's uncle last week was because he had a missile launcher pointed at us!" And HFMSMR says, "I must be unbiased, because both of them are upset!"

And that, ladies and gentlemen, is where we are. And because extremists understand this arithmetic, they take ever more extreme positions, knowing that will drive fair and balanced coverage in their direction.

Message to the Washington Post: Your job is not to be fair, or balanced. Your job is to be true and honest.

Posted by Andy at 06:51 PM | | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (2)

Search


Categories

Archives

  • October 2007
  • May 2007
  • March 2007
  • February 2007
  • January 2007
  • December 2006
  • November 2006
  • October 2006
  • September 2006
  • August 2006
  • July 2006
  • June 2006
  • May 2006
  • April 2006
  • March 2006

    • Recent Posts

    BlogRoll

    PoliBlogs
    InstaPundit
    Betsy Newmark
    A Constrained Vision
    Michael Totten
    Cox and Forkum
    Gus Van Horn
    Dinocrat
    Victor Davis Hanson
    Jewish Bloggers
    Meryl Yourish
    IsraellyCool
    AbbaGav
    Elder of Ziyon
    SoccerDad
    Solomonia
    Israel Matzav
    Daled Amos
    Treppenwitz
    Joe Schick (warning - Jets fan!)
    Dry Bones
    DD 214
    Winds Of Change
    Blackfive
    Shehrezad
    Captain's Quarters
    The Other Side of the Coin
    Lebanonesque
    Sandmonkey
    Eteraz
    Apple Blogs
    The Unofficial Apple Weblog
    Professional Blogs
    Ann Althouse
    Craig Newmark
    Greg Mankiw
    The Windkey and the Lamplighter
    An InfoSec Place
    Bruce Schneier
    Football Sources
    Reiss's Pieces
    Gregg Easterbrook (NFL)
    Endorsements
    Online Integrity Statement of Principles
    Subscribe to this blog's feed
    [What is this?]
    Powered by
    Movable Type 3.2
    Visitors since 17 July 2006

    Contact

    andy [at] cozikin [dot] com