On Sept 4th, Roy Greenslade, the Guardian’s media blogger, published the following article about the new public broadcasting law in Israel.
The Guardian headline alludes to a provision in the bill which bans the expression of personal opinions on public broadcast news programs. The provision stated that public broadcasts should “avoid one-sidedness, prejudice, expressing personal opinions, giving grades and affixing labels, ignoring facts or selectively emphasizing them not according to their newsworthiness.”
Despite the fact that public service broadcasters in the US and the UK (PBS and the BBC) similarly have explicit prohibitions against bias and political propaganda, and the fact that the Israeli law indeed only applied to publicly funded news programs, Greenslade’s story focused on complaints that the provision was designed to “stifle dissent” in the country.
Nonetheless, a few hours after the Guardian story ran, reports were published in the Israeli media that Benjamin Netanyahu (who also serves as Communications Minister in his government) opposed the provision, and that it would likely be rescinded.
We then tweeted the Guardian journalist to update him on the latest developments.
Greenslade responded positively to our tweet, and published a new report with the updated information on the likely removal of the controversial clause.
Here’s the exchange.
Here’s the headline of Greenslade’s new Guardian report:
We commend Mr. Greenslade for responding positively to our tweet about the law and updating the story accordingly.
Like this:
Like Loading...
COMMITTEE FOR ACCURACY IN MIDDLE EAST REPORTING AND ANALYSIS
UK Media Watch prompts update to Guardian report on Israel public broadcasting law
On Sept 4th, Roy Greenslade, the Guardian’s media blogger, published the following article about the new public broadcasting law in Israel.
The Guardian headline alludes to a provision in the bill which bans the expression of personal opinions on public broadcast news programs. The provision stated that public broadcasts should “avoid one-sidedness, prejudice, expressing personal opinions, giving grades and affixing labels, ignoring facts or selectively emphasizing them not according to their newsworthiness.”
Despite the fact that public service broadcasters in the US and the UK (PBS and the BBC) similarly have explicit prohibitions against bias and political propaganda, and the fact that the Israeli law indeed only applied to publicly funded news programs, Greenslade’s story focused on complaints that the provision was designed to “stifle dissent” in the country.
Nonetheless, a few hours after the Guardian story ran, reports were published in the Israeli media that Benjamin Netanyahu (who also serves as Communications Minister in his government) opposed the provision, and that it would likely be rescinded.
We then tweeted the Guardian journalist to update him on the latest developments.
Greenslade responded positively to our tweet, and published a new report with the updated information on the likely removal of the controversial clause.
Here’s the exchange.
Here’s the headline of Greenslade’s new Guardian report:
We commend Mr. Greenslade for responding positively to our tweet about the law and updating the story accordingly.
Related articles
Like this:
Our take on the Guardian’s new Jerusalem correspondent
You may also like
Independent corrects misleading article on Macron outburst
After complaint, Daily Mail posts new article revealing the bigotry of an ‘anti-racist’
CiF Watch prompts Indy correction to false claim by Robert Fisk about Netanyahu