|
Communique: 12 April 2005
[View
this article online]
[Discuss this topic on BackSpin]
'SHOWDOWN' AT THE CRAWFORD CORRAL?
Dear HonestReporting Subscriber,
On Monday (April 11), Israeli
Prime Minister Sharon met President Bush at Bush's Crawford
Ranch in Texas.
News coverage of this important
meeting was remarkable for the disparity between the actual
content of the meeting, and how the media represented it.
Though Bush and Sharon largely conveyed mutual support and
understanding, the media described a supposed 'Texas showdown'
over the Israeli community of Maale Adumim, just to the east
of Jerusalem, which the Israeli government has recently spoken
of expanding.
PRE-MEETING
COVERAGE
The
day began with media outlets predicting the leaders would
clash over settlements at Crawford. Take, for example, this
CNN
headline:
The
LA
Times also built up the 'tension' and 'discord' in its
pre-meeting headline:
THE MEETING ITSELF At
the actual press conference, President Bush emphasized the
following points, in this order (see transcript
here):
1)
Israeli security: 'The United States is committed to Israel's
security.. (under) secure and defensible borders.'
2) Economics: 'We discussed
ways to expand cooperation of our economies.'
3) Gaza Plan:
'Sharon is showing visionary leadership... I strongly
support his courageous initiative to disengage from Gaza
and part of the West Bank.'
4) Growth
of Democracy: 'the important and encouraging changes
taking place in the region, including a Palestinian election.'
5) U.S.
support of Palestinian
state
6) Joint
commitment to road
map
7) Need
for 'an immediate, strong and sustained effort to combat
terrorism in all its forms'
8) Settlements: 'Israel should remove
unauthorized outposts and meet its road map obligations
regarding settlements in the West Bank... (but) As I
said last April, new realities on the ground make it unrealistic
to expect that the outcome of final status negotiations
will be a full and complete return to the armistice lines
of 1949.
Note that settlements
were the last of eight items addressed by Bush, qualified by
Bush's reiteration that Israel's return to the Green Line is
'unrealistic'.
Then, despite reporters' efforts
to foist the Maale Adumim issue onto the agenda during the
question-and-answer session, Bush repeatedly emphasized that
the real test right now is in Gaza. Said Bush, 'To me, that's
where the attention of the world ought to be, in Gaza.'
COVERAGE OF THE MEETING
But
media coverage of the meeting completely distorted its actual
content. Most media outlets clung to their own speculation
that conflict over settlements would characterize the meeting.
For example:
CNN: The
first six paragraphs from CNN's
report addressed Israeli settlements, and featured this
headline:
MSNBC
put this headline on an AP report:
The
AP review describes Bush 'prod(ding) Israeli Prime Minister
Ariel Sharon Monday to abandon plans to expand a key Jewish
settlement in the West Bank.' Where exactly, if one reviews
the transcript,
was Bush's 'prodding' on Maale Adumim?
Reuters'
report editorialized that 'the two leaders failed
to reach a consensus on the issue (settlements) that is at
the heart of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and trumpeted
this headline:
Nowhere
in Bush's comments ― before, during or after the Crawford
meeting ― did he ever 'caution' Sharon, explicitly or
implicitly. On what basis does Reuters promote such fiction
in its headline?
So
while the real focus of yesterday's meeting was an unprecedented,
imminent and painful uprooting of 21 Israeli settlements
in Gaza ― which the U.S. supports ― the media
preferred to manufacture some 'tension' and 'dispute' between
the two nations over possible building of settlements.
This
was a classic case of the media being more committed to its
own agenda than it is to reporting the objective facts.
Did
your local media coverage also distort the content of the
Bush-Sharon meeting? If so, HonestReporting encourages you
to write a letter pointing out the disparity between the documented
event itself, and the media's spin.
Thank you for your ongoing
involvement in the battle against media bias.
HonestReporting
|