Here’s how Donald Macintyre, veteran journalist for The Independent (and the paper’s former Jerusalem correspondent), explains the putative change in David Cameron’s foreign policy since taking office, which critics of the prime minister have charged with being increasingly ‘soft’ on Jerusalem.
So, an unnamed source claimed that Britain’s increasing sympathy towards Israel was facilitated by ‘Jewish donors’ who pressured the prime minister to change course, and that’s enough analysis for the seasoned foreign correspondent?
Were alternative explanations for Cameron’s alleged shift even explored?
Is this seriously what passes for professional journalism in the UK now? Have the British opinion elites’ views on the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict become so sclerotic and ideologically-driven that old journalistic standards – which value careful analysis, empirical evidence and the use of primary sources over conjecture, prejudice and anonymous claims – are no longer in vogue?
Finally, we of course would also be interested to learn if Indy editors were at all concerned over the use of such a flimsy “source” to buttress a narrative which has historically served to reinforce toxic tropes about Jewish control of non-Jewish world leaders.