Newspapers lie (see the correction below.) They deceive and misrepresent. A student who blindly accepts the “facts” from a front-page story in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch or The New York Times performs not only a disservice to themselves, but often, when they choose to publicize their ill-informed opinion, to the larger Washington University community.
The above statements are not controversial. Many college students would agree with my unfavorable assessment of American journalism. But few of us, including those cognizant of mass media’s faults, actually allow our criticisms to color our beliefs. Rather than acknowledging our ignorance, we often embrace the snapshot -the singular news story we happened to come across – as the be all and end all, the ultimate truth. In matters we can know little about, we continue to spout our opinions with increasing steadfastness, resolve, and intensity.
Take the case of my comparative politics class last Wednesday. Asked by the professor to discuss an issue of international import, a student responded with commentary on the Arab-Israeli conflict. He mentioned Israel’s crackdown in the West Bank, the recent use of military force by Israeli soldiers against Palestinians, and American provision of military supplies to the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF.) Whether the student understood the one-sided nature of this “objective” news story remains to be seen. I believe he merely wished to demonstrate that he had completed the professor’s assignment. Either way, his comments did not suggest a familiarity of the context in which the picture was taken. The Palestinian-Israeli conflict must be understood within the larger, centuries-old Arab-Israeli conflict, the history of the State of Israel, and the recent Palestinian uprisings, or intifadas. The specific claims made by the student (which were factually correct), must also be understood within the contemporary Israeli psyche.
Israel’s crackdown in the West Bank is a response to increased terrorist activity. The most basic function of any state is the defense of its citizenry, and the steps taken by the IDF – often reluctantly – are adopted in the hope of preventing increasingly common terrorist attacks. Simply put, they’re meant to save lives. Similarly, soldiers’ use of force, however undesirable, has been a byproduct of conflict for centuries, and will, unfortunately, continue in the Middle East. Police cannot overcome terror with defensive measures alone. Finally, the article’s focus on American support of the IDF omits an equally troubling concern for Israelis, American support for Palestinian terror. Provisions within recent peace accords call upon the international community to financially support the Palestinian Authority (PA), including the Palestinian police. Over the past couple months, evidence has come to light suggesting that resources allocated to the PA are funding attacks against Israel. When current and former Palestinian policemen terrorize Israel, public sentiment for peace wanes in the Jewish state.
These arguments are but a few of the ones I heard during a recent one-week tour of Israel coordinated by the Anti-Defamation League (ADL.) Traveling as part of a group of campus newspaper editors, I met with and had the pleasure of interviewing numerous high-level government and military officials, peace negotiators, ambassadors, anti-terrorism specialists, senior Israeli, American and Palestinian journalists, and leaders of numerous religions, communities and minorities within the State of Israel. At the trip’s conclusion, the ADL’s Director of Higher Education Affairs, Jeffrey Ross, suggested that before visiting Israel, most people end their sentences with exclamation points, but after touring the country, they end their sentences with question marks. So it was for me.
Despite my basic familiarity with the country and its struggles, the trip to Israel prompted more questions than answers. While I continue to hold certain opinions (eg. Arafat must crack down on terrorists, if not with 100% results, at least with 110% effort) I am no longer so certain in my convictions. I recognize Jewish settlements in the West Bank as inflammatory and offensive to Palestinians, and accept the desires of the Palestinian people for a state to call their own. Previously black and white photographs have become many shades of gray.
I am aware of the inherent irony of this article; an opinion editor suggesting students be less forthcoming and resolute with their opinions. And I cannot claim that this piece is without bias. I continue to wear Israeli dog tags (sold to me by WU AIPAC) and call for the return of kidnapped Israeli soldiers. I am a product of the country in which I was born and the religion I grew up into. But I have come to recognize that my opinions, and everybody else’s, are based upon snapshots of reality. Pictures may be worth a thousand words, but to adequately address the Arab-Israeli conflict, I’d need at least a million, as would a staff writer. Next time you read a news story, read critically, ask questions, and when you’ve finished the article, read another. Don’t frame the picture as your own, take another.