Editor's Notes: Danny Seaman’s farewell voyage

[shira]

<snip>

Part of my problem with the foreign press – and I’ve been accused of being combative and feisty in fighting them – is that you have journalists coming in here not having the faintest idea of what is going on. They live off what they get from their colleagues; they meet certain people who come from the same social-economic background; they live off of one newspaper, Haaretz. They don’t make an effort. When you have a conversation with them, you find that they have a complete lack of knowledge of the elementary issues.

This didn’t used to be the case. Journalists from the ’70s, ’80s, who were here during the beginning of the ’90s, were very knowledgeable, very experienced. This is a different generation. The narrative has shifted. They’ll adopt the Palestinian narrative. That has become the bon ton. They’ll talk about “the Palestinian right of return.” There is no such thing. They talk about what the Palestinians call “Israel’s violations of Oslo.” What exactly are they talking about? They have no knowledge about the facts.

Today, if you bring in, say, an expert on international law , they delegitimize the person based on what they perceive to be his political opinions. This is unacceptable, especially for a journalist. We the people, in a democratic society, rely on them to provide us with the information for us to make an educated decision on a particular issue. In this case, many journalists are failing in their duty. The media outfits that employ them are giving them automatic backing. And when the media doesn’t exercise its checks and balances, they’re failing in their job.

This began with the year 2000.

<snip>

more...
http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Editorials/Article.aspx?id=194079

[whosinpower]

1. Another take on Israel's PR issue

http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Columnists/Article.aspx?id=193976

Same newspaper - same day - different author.

Above The Fray: The real problem behind Israel’s dismal PR

snip - But Israel cannot simply complain about the discriminatory treatment it receives and make hardly any effort to explain itself. The decline of relations with Turkey offers a prime example. Between 2005 and 2009, Israel’s efforts to explain to the Turkish public the onslaught of Hamas rocket attacks appeared to be few and far between. As the Turkish public became increasingly critical, Israel dismissed the trend as a sign of the influence of the new Islamic-rooted AKP party in its rise to power, not the result of poor PR (or policies).

snip - In fact, disunity in the coalition is significantly damaging PR in two important arenas: in New York, where outreach and communications with the American Jewish community is critical, and at the UN, where Israel faces an onslaught of criticism and delegitimization on a daily basis. Netanyahu and Lieberman have been unable even to agree who should serve as consul general in New York or ambassador to the UN. As a result, interim diplomats are currently filling each post. If the prime minister and foreign minister cannot even agree on the messenger, how can they ever agree on a cohesive, positive message, not to speak of a constructive policy? And without that message, the country’s image is suffering greatly.

snip - Contrary to the public’s indifference to global opinion, Israel’s dismal public relations are dangerous for the prospect of peace and for security.

In fact, to effectively counter the impact of these campaigns, Israel should send the global community the kind of concerted, positive message which it is sorely lacking.