BY SHAHJAHAN SARWAR
The western media, a so-called model for neutrality and verification in journalism, allegedly fails to keep balance when it reports Israel-Palestine conflict. The language and words which are being used to convey ground reports from Gaza is contrary to the ground situation and tainted the ‘powerful’ and ‘transparent’ media image.
Western media outlets fuel the emotional sentiments while deliberately ignoring the Israeli atrocities in East Jerusalem and Gaza. It has been observed that the U.S and European media houses downplayed the Israel-Palestine conflict and portrayed Israel attacks as a right to defense. The ‘deliberate confusions’ in use of words will leave bold blots on the pages of history for posterity.
The recent injustice with the residents of Shaikh Jarrah area of East Jerusalem should not only be condemned by international platforms but it urges peace-keeping bodies to intervene immediately for a ceasefire at earliest. Israel is evicting people living there, and protests broke out between Palestine people and Jews settlers in West Bank and Gaza as reported on multiple media sources but the whole situation is being labelled as ‘Israel is responding to the aggression from Palestine’.
Caretakers of democracy have alleged under-hand agreement with media houses that report with inappropriate vocabulary to make Israel happy. It is worthy to mention here that the Palestineians right to protest is being renamed as “clash” in western media reports. The same way, attackers are retaliators when the authoritative powers to some extent are entertained by the attackers themselves.
AFP calls the conflict as mere ‘eviction’ when the word was inappropriate here to use in this case. The western media under the garb of gigantic vocabulary tries to make the woes of Palestinians clandestine and secret. When it could be called ‘forced expulsion’ but rather AFP stated it as a mere property dispute.
The tragic blunders in the use of words must be put into question. Using inappropriate words incongruous with the situational happenings is disinformation and an illegal act according to media laws and ethics.
Palestinians are labelled about in newspapers as inferring of the equal responsibility of the conflict, contrary to the fact, who is the culprit and who bears the brunt of hardships, usurpation of human rights, and being deprived of their homes in East Jerusalem.
The words are more powerful than actions in emotional essence. The U.S elite press New York Times (NYT) wanted to lessen the feeling of intense atrocity that Israeli Defence Forces (IDF) are committing upon Palestinians by using the word “remove” rather than ‘expel’.
Western media is being alleged of reporting with less effective words to downplay the severity of importance.
Taking an example from Indo-Pak history, freedom fighter Bhagat Singh maintained in the court that there was no possibility for table talks between the weak (India) and the strong (British government in India), and authorities could not stop to revolutionize his belief, strategy, and method against the British rule in India. Same fits for Israel-Palestine conflict.
Palestinians could not retaliate but are a target of Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) just because of the low prevalence of international human rights in Jerusalem.
Conclusively, the Western media has the onus to be fair enough according to media laws and ethics. The media houses reported to be using inappropriate vocabulary should refrain from misleading the people and must educate about what is happening in Gaza, Palestine and Western Bank with balanced reporting and appropriate use of words.
The writer is a student of BS Mass Communication at Faculty of Media and Communication Studies (FMCS), University of Central Punjab (UCP).