This isn’t actually a week’s worth of news recaps. It is about the news that comes to you every week, though. And day. And hour. And minute. And second. Over and over and over.
And about one story, in particular, that illustrates one of the biggest problems with mass media in the world (and journalism, in general). It was a perfect example of real news packaged up and labeled all proper-like, delivered right to your front doorstep with your name on it. Only your name is Amazon, and it was a package sent by those wholesale dirtball scammers who, when you buy 12 cans of their stocked disinfectant for $100, send you 7000 toothbrushes and charge you $100 per brush. And soon you’ll be out around $19 million.
There was a simple story out of the AFP, the big international news agency out of France, about Israel admitting it bombed southern Lebanon in retaliation for Hezbollah’s alleged violation the Western-brokered ceasefire. Here’s how it went: Hezbollah fired projectiles on Israeli forces in a zone whose territory is disputed, and Israel retaliated. That was essentially the gist of it.
This kind of story has been reported a million times over. They could teach in any low-level journalism course. The structure is how you’re taught to convey news to the reading public, as a journalist: This is what happened, based on what we were told. This is what one side’s leader says about it, this is what the other side’s leader or spokesperson says about it. One side denies any wrongdoing, implies they’re the ones in the right. So does the other. Here’s what happened yesterday, by the way, for some historical context. Here’s what some lower-level official says about the situation’s likely future. Here’s what the state-run news agencies on both sides say about it. Here’s what a professor, historian, diplomat or politician thousands of miles away says about it. Here’s a more in-depth breakdown of the last 48 hours. Here’s what the ceasefire was, sort of. Here’s the immediate history of the brokering of the ceasefire; here’s who took part.
What’s not taught in schools of journalism is how to politically or ideologically frame a story; you learn that once you start working at a bureau or in the field. For example, the title “Israel Says Hit Hezbollah Targets in Lebanon”, with accompanying photo, is really a good example. Instantly, your given a particular point of view. This implies the person telling it to you, presumably neutral in the affair, inherently trusts one side over the other in a two-sided dispute. (Whether true or not, the implication is there.) The story then begins with: “Israel says it hit dozens of Hezbollah targets in strikes on Lebanon Monday after vowing retaliation for an attack claimed by Hezbollah…”*. Again—what one of two side says, first and foremost.
Now, the AFP could just throw up its hands and say: ‘This is what was brought to us! It’s news! This was the first bit of information we got about it, and we’re just reporting it! We didn’t get any information from the other side fast enough! We have to stay on top of world events if we’re to bring the biggest stories to our readers, and this is what was handed to us, this is relevant and we’re just reporting it!! It’s not not news, right? What’s wrong with it? WE’RE JUST REPORTING WHAT HAPPENED!! IT’S F—ING NEWS!!’
Indeed, I went back to the article, and by around 3:00 pm PST the next day, the headline had completely changed. “Lebanon Says Nine Killed in Israeli Strikes on Southern Villages” it now read, beginning: “Nine people were killed in Israeli strikes on villages in southern Lebanon Monday, after Israel said it was taking aim at dozens of Hezbollah targets in retaliation for yadda yadda yadda” (emphasis and yadda yaddas added for effect).
Now they’ve got a headline that seems less biased. ‘WE’RE JUST REPORTING WHAT HAPPENED!! WHAT DO YOU MEAN IT’S ONE OF THOSE FAKE AMAZON PACKAGES WITH THE 7000 TOOTHBRUSHES?!! IT’S F—ING NEWS!!!’ The story, however, remained the same.
Take the final sentence, which hadn’t at all been altered: “The [Israeli] army said it was responding to ‘several acts by Hezbollah in Lebanon that posed a threat to Israeli civilians in violation of the understandings between Israel and Lebanon’.”
*BOOM* (mic drop)
It starts with what one side says, and while seeming to tell the whole story, it ends with what that same side says.
What it also does is omits the fact that Israel was the first to actually break the ceasefire, less than 48 hours after signing. Israel claimed, with no real evidence, that it did because “several suspects” (implied: Hezbollah militants) ventured into territory they were told to stay out of. The Lebanese military responded by saying they were trying to establish temporary checkpoints, and were setting off unexploded ordnance in the area to make it safer for those trying to return. Lebanon’s state-run National News Agency reported that only civilians were hurt by Israeli fire, and that Israeli tanks continued to bombard villages and farms, for no apparent reason (emphasis added again).
Now, I can’t outright say the AFP article is biased. I really can’t. But I will say this.
Forget the Amazon package metaphor, and pretend now the incident is a scuffle between two kids on a grade school playground. And you, the reader, are the principal. You were first told about the fight from another teacher, and everyone who’s described it to you since is a friend of either one fighter or the other.
How do you figure out what really happened?
Well, first of all, you may never. Because everyone, including the teacher who first reported it, may have some reason to want to make one student look good, or see the other fail, regardless of what really happened. Maybe the teacher hates that little a–hole pervert Jeffrey McShlockencutty, and wants to see him in detention every day for the rest of his god-forsaken grade school life for all the jokes he’s made about her post-partum diastasis recti bulge, or whatever. Maybe.
Ideally, you need to rely on unbiased eyewitness testimony of the entire event—testimony from people who have no horse in that race. They don’t care who looks good or bad, who’s friends with whom, whose image is at stake, how the political playground scales will tip. They believe in what’s right, they don’t have a fear or mistrust of authority, and understand that a truly informed public and its leadership tend to keep a general society unbiased and just, and that the maximal amount of people who reside in that society will benefit from an objectively righteous outcome. Ideally. But they’re hard to come by. About as hard as a witness who has an interest in telling you the story, without some ulterior motive. Like banking $19 million in Amazon ripoff money.
Sorry—mixing metaphors there.
Everyone who enlightens you either represents the victim, or represents the victor/oppressor. Including the teller.
And this is coming out of the daily news.
So, what do you do?
You can look at the history of scuffles between the two. Had there been any before? What were the circumstances? And their homelives. Is one of them a rich, spoiled prick whose dad’s the mayor or chief of police? Or a loner who causes trouble because his parents won’t pay him any attention? Is one of them a baiter—you know, one of those kids who walks around causing shadowy mayhem, and then when you catch him letting all the air out of one of your bike tires, says, “What, are you gonna hit me? My dad’s a lawyer. We’ll sue you for assault and take you to court. We got five extra houses already that way,” while you’re standing there with a cocked fist, looking at him, wondering what life would be like without a house anymore.
In the end, you may never know. In the end, you’re completely on your own. It’s up to you to make the call. But you need to make a call, and an informed one. You are the principal, and you’re the one responsible for settling the matter. Because if you don’t, the entire school district’s billion-dollar e-commerce vendor system might just fall apart, leading to a massive localized collapse of the global economy.
Sorry. Mixed metaphors there.
* – By now I’m guessing the story has been further altered**. Though I’m also guessing the gist of it remains the same***.
** – It has been.
*** – It does.
