Ridiculously, this article gives a wide platform to Aharon Barak, former president of Israel’s Supreme Court, who says there’s 'no evidence' that Israel violated international humanitarian law.
Poor coverage - Media outlet to be critiqued
A CJPME Media Researcher has launched a media alert for the following article. Please submit a quick response to the media, even if it’s just a sentence or two:
Title of Piece: Nathan VanderKlippe: "Israel not in violation of humanitarian law, Israeli jurist says"
Media Outlet: Globe and Mail
Click here to access the piece on-line
Comments of the CJPME Media Researcher:
(Note: Please do not copy and paste the material below as the content to your message to the media - put all comments in your own words):
Please help us challenge Globe and Mail and Nathan Vanderklippe for a one-sided article justifying Israel’s war crimes.
Ridiculously, this article gives a wide platform to Aharon Barak, former president of Israel’s Supreme Court, who says there’s 'no evidence' that Israel violated international humanitarian law. Barak's arguments contradict the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, the International Criminal Court, and many other reputable NGOs and human rights organizations. The Globe and Mail has spilled an alarming amount of ink to platform justifications for Israel's genocidal actions.
There are many possible angles to take in criticizing this coverage. Foremost, the article fails to meaningfully challenge or express skepticism around dangerous claims made by Barak:
- The journalist should have challenged Barak for his assertion that civilian casualities are acceptable
- The journlaist should have challenged Barak for his assertion that Israel is allowed to cut off water, food, medicine and fuel to civilians in a war zone.
- The journlaist should have challenged Barak for his assertion that Israel is allowed to force civilians from their homes
- The journalist should have consulted Palestinian jurists, or the many other experts who would have challenged Barak's positions
- The journalist should have explained that Barak wasn't actually interpreting international law, but rather his take on Israeli laws.
Sadly, in the article, the Globe and Mail gives us a fringe, and long-winded rejection of international law. When one considers the Globe and Mail's horrible editorial position, it's not surprising. But these trends in Canadian media must be strongly challenged.
Please click here to launch an email in which you can draft a response to this media coverage. If this link does not work for you, simply open an email in your email program, address it to [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], and draft and send your email.
If you have any problems, please email [email protected].
Thank you very much. Every response makes a difference.