Grammar: the media’s (not so) secret weapon
Image source: https://thewritepractice.com/secret-writing-weapon/
What does grammar have to do with media bias in covering the current Israeli-Palestinian conflict?
I’ve seen a few people point out that a big issue with the media’s coverage of the extremely disproportionate Israeli attacks against the Palestinians is the use of active versus passive voice.
The mainstream media often use the active voice (The Palestinians did X) when Palestinians shoot rockets that kill civilians or damage buildings, and the passive voice (X was done by Israelis, or not even mentioning the Israelis) whenever Israelis launch bombs that kill civilians or damage buildings.
Here’s a great tweet about the NY Times doing this
It’s hard to pick up on at first if you’re not looking for it. Let’s switch it around and it’s clearer what the problem is. Compare the published version with my revised version.
Israeli forces have killed more than 67 Palestinians, including 16 children, since the start of the conflict, Palestinian officials said. At least six Israeli civilians have died, including a 5-year-old boy and one soldier.
In the first version by the NY Times
It isn’t stated how the Palestinians died. Was it slipping on banana peals? Was it Darth Vader and his light saber? Or did Israeli attack and/or bomb them?
It says what or who killed the Israelis: Hamas’s and/or Islamic Jihad’s rockets.
It’s true that it says the rockets “are fired”, which is passive, but says by whom: by Hamas and Islamic Jihad.
On the other hand, who or what killed the Palestinians isn’t stated (for example, it doesn’t say “by Israeli forces”)
That’s not to mention other implicit bias.
The dead Israelis were “civilians.” That’s horrible and should be reported. Were the Palestinians who died civilians, too?
Hamas and its ally, Islamic Jihad, are named. If we figure out that the Israeli military (or Netanyahu, or the government) killed the Palestinians, why not mention Israel’s ally, the United States, who supplies Israel with $3.8 billion every year in military aid and the technology behind the bombs Israel’s government is using to kill Palestinians? Does Islamic Jihad give Hamas $3.8 billion a year?
All that bias in one short paragraph. And the New York Times has been criticized for pro-Israeli bias in the past.
Now can I say this for sure was a conscious choice by the article writer or editor? No. But it’s prevalent. If you look at the Washington Post, LA Times, CNN, and others — even the AP whose headquarters Israel purposely bombed and destroyed — I can almost guarantee you that you’ll see wording like this and selective presentation of the facts to favor or excuse the far-right Israeli government’s war crimes.
We in the general public need to be aware of media bias and make sure we consult a variety of sources to try to get the full story and understand different perspectives.
The coverage now in the US is straddling, or even crossing, the line between reporting the news and becoming pro-Israel war propaganda.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
🚨 Before you go, don’t forget to vote in the poll for which progressive org or cause will get May’s $50 donation from eclecticmisc.org!
If you like this post, please explore the rest of the site, share it on social media, and/or comment below. Thanks!
