This kind of puerile tantrum is so sad it’s almost not worth posting. This point of view is, however, valuable as it reveals that many aspire not to nudge the press toward neutrality and objectivity, but to muscle and intimidate the media into mirroring a preferred point of view.
On Monday, an NBC News/Wall Street Journal/Marist poll showed that there is a vast chasm separating the number of Americans’ who support Israel versus the meager sliver of the public who backs Hamas in the current conflict in Gaza. The media’s coverage of the war in Gaza has in no way reflected American public sentiment.
It is clear that Hamas’s only strategy against Israel — maximizing the number of civilian casualties in order to generate sympathy for their cause in the Western press — has been and continues to be successful. While even the Arab world has given up on negotiating with their irrational interlocutors in Gaza, only members of the press in the West continue to demand Israel give up on the prosecution of this war and negotiate an unfavorable peace. Recent weeks have left regular news media viewers with the unmistakable impression that Israel is winning the war everywhere but on the media front.
Enter another universe now where the American press is an ethnocentric jingoist monolith plagued by racism against Muslims. That, at least, is journalist Glenn Greenwald’s take.
In an interview with Huffington Post Lives’ Marc Lamont Hill, who just yesterday called Israel’s inability to entirely prevent civilian casualties when that is the enemy objective suggestive that this is “an unjust war,” Greenwald said that the American press deserves an “F” for their coverage of the conflict.
“There’s no question that the way that the American media covers this conflict is based on the principle that Israeli lives are just inherently more valuable than Palestinian lives,” Greenwald slandered.
“It takes probably 50 Palestinians being killed to get anywhere near the attention of, say, an elderly Israeli woman being frightened in her home and having some kind of a medical problem because of the trauma,” he continued.
“I think there’s a racist element to it. I think there’s an ethnocentric element to it,” the independent journalist and Edward Snowden confidant said of the American media’s coverage of the war. “There’s definitely an anti-Muslim strain that runs throughout how this coverage is conducted.”
By citing the body count disparity and demanding that the world react to Palestinian deaths as America did to “9/11,” Greenwald asks his audience to abandon reason and logic and surrender to emotion. That may explain the cloying and mawkish nature of his plea – demonstrate emotion in order to elicit emotion. Greenwald offers the public a lotus and bids them sleep – this may be satisfying, and it sure as hell is easier, but it would not be intellectually honest.
Greenwald knows this. He knows that his appeal will be met with deserved skepticism. That’s why he preemptively calls those whom he is scolding “racist” rather than seek to understand any of the real factors which create the conditions that prevail in America’s newsrooms and color the coverage of the Gaza war.
His must be paralyzing and confusing existence. When all of your opponents are malicious and hard hearted, you excuse yourself of having to expend any real energy seeking to understand their motives. That is a petulant and juvenile way of looking at the world, one which most of us grew out of long ago.