About Us

Join the Conversation


  1. says: Michael Vaar

    This should be of interest — especially note para 3: clearly, the Israelis are launching missiles just because they can, they don’t need a reason. Palestinian missiles, of course, were only launched in response, and it’s just too bad they didn’t kill anyone!
    And I love how Israel’s ‘apartheid system” is just an unarguable fact.
    I’m guessing this is an opinion piece, but the Independent hasn’t exerted any editorial control.

  2. says: Phil Fine

    Is there any body in the U.K. that handles complaints about news reporters on TV? I want to lodge a complaint about Anna Botting of Sky News.


    Phil Fine
    Arad, Israel

  3. says: Phil Fine

    Between 8:30 and nine this morning, Tue., Oct., 24, Israel time, CNN ran a report from a Beirut correspondents about human suffering in Gaza. But the correspondent failed to ask any Gazans why they allowed Hamas, Islamic Jihad, et. al. to burrow so deeply into the fabric of Gazan society.

    I’d like to raise this issue with CNN. But I failed to get the name of the correspondent. Nor can I seem to find a name and email for CNN’s complaint department.

    Perhaps you can help me.


    Phil Fine
    Arad, Israel

  4. says: Phil Fine

    Here’s the boiler plate response I got from Sky News regarding my complaint about its “correspondent” (sic) Anna Botting:

    Good evening Phil,

    Thank you for your email regarding a recent interview on Sky News. As a news organisation it is our role to ask sometimes difficult questions of those in positions of authority.

    Sky News has heard a full range of opinions about this news story, and does not take a position on this or any other story.

    We are comfortable that we gave Mr Regev a respectful forum to put across his points and we look forward to having him back on Sky News as the war continues.

    Thank you for taking the time to share your feedback with us.

    Best wishes

    Sky Viewer Relations

  5. says: Prof. Ron Goldstein

    Sky news has become anti-truth almost to the level of the BBC, after being only slightly so for a long time.

    They now publish “explainers” all the time. These are full of 1/4 truths and leave out the most pertinent information that an “explainer” should include.
    Perhaps someone can write point-by-point responses/corrections to these “explainers”?

Leave a comment
Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *