web analytics
September 17, 2014 / 22 Elul, 5774
At a Glance
InDepth
Sponsored Post
Apartment 758x530 Africa-Israel at the Israel Real Estate Exhibition in New York

Africa Israel Residences, part of the Africa Israel Investments Group led by international businessman Lev Leviev, will present 7 leading projects on the The Israel Real Estate Exhibition in New York on Sep 14-15, 2014.



Home » InDepth » Monitor »

…As We Were Saying


It’s certainly been a while, hasn’t it? And yet it seems like the conversation was never really interrupted, as I’ve enjoyed, in the three and a half months since this column last appeared, many an interesting exchange, via e-mail and phone, with some very intelligent readers.

First things first: I’ve removed the word “Media” from the name of the column, since the subjects discussed here are hardly limited to critiques of and musings on the Fifth Estate. That doesn’t mean, however, that the media won’t continue to be a frequent topic of discussion; in fact, I plan to devote several upcoming columns to media myths that have come to be widely accepted as irrefutable truth.

Another change is that the column won’t be a weekly (it actually ceased being one some time ago, though an “official” proclamation of such was never made) but will appear every two or three weeks, based mainly on how busy I am with my other responsibilities at The Jewish Press.

Looking back over the decade and a half since the Monitor was launched, there is one question readers have asked with far greater frequency than any other. It’s a simple one, and it goes basically like this: What is the most open and shut thing you can say about the media after doing a column like this for so long?

The answer reflects the general direction of American politics in recent decades: With the rarest of exceptions, liberal pundits and news outlets are far less likely to be supportive of Israel than their conservative counterparts.

The evidence is overwhelming: Whereas conservatives, other than some relatively marginal paleoconservatives writing for a handful of mostly obscure web and print outlets, tend to be strongly supportive of Israel and highly skeptical of Arab intentions, almost the exact reverse is true among liberals and leftists.

The most staunchly pro-Israel newspapers, magazines, websites, and cable networks – Wall Street Journal, New York Post, National Review, Weekly Standard, Commentary, FrontPageMag.com, American Spectator, Fox News and others too numerous to mention here – are virtually all on the right side of the political divide.

In striking contrast, media outlets characterized by ambivalent or hostile positions on Israel – New York Times, Los Angeles Times, Washington Post, The New Yorker, The Nation, The American Prospect, Harper’s, CNN, Salon, Daily Kos – are almost all found on the liberal-left end of the spectrum.

And it’s not just liberal writers and editors who look at Israel with a jaundiced eye: readers who post comments on even the most mainstream liberal websites tend to refer to Israel in terms so vituperative they could have been lifted straight from neo-Nazi and Islamist sources. Meanwhile, Palestinians are portrayed as eternal victims of cruel and imperialistic Israeli policies.

In terms of columnists and commentators, any list of the most consistent and unflinching supporters of Israel would include, for starters, George Will, Cal Thomas, R. Emmett Tyrrell Jr., Charles Krauthammer, William Kristol, Ralph Peters, John Podhoretz, Jeff Jacoby, Jonah Goldberg, Michael Medved, Rush Limbaugh, David Horowitz, Rich Lowry, and Jay Nordlinger – none of whom can be described as liberal (though a much younger Krauthammer was a speechwriter for 1984 Democratic presidential nominee Walter Mondale).

There are, of course, liberal pundits who on a good day are at least somewhat supportive of Israel, but as is the case with, say, Thomas Friedman, that support almost always comes with at least a caveat and criticism or two and the plaintive wish that Israel would act with more “understanding” and “restraint.”

That such a sharp liberal/conservative media divide exists on the issue of Israel should hardly come as a surprise. For years now, polls have shown conservatives to be considerably more supportive of Israel than liberals. Likewise, Americans who identify themselves as Republicans poll significantly higher than self-described Democrats in siding with Israel against its Arab enemies.

The most reliable indicator of support for Israel, then, is not whether one is Jewish or gentile, or where one lives, or what one does for a living. The real test seems to be whether one is conservative or liberal. Why should journalists and other media types be any different?

About the Author: Jason Maoz is the Senior Editor of The Jewish Press.


If you don't see your comment after publishing it, refresh the page.

Our comments section is intended for meaningful responses and debates in a civilized manner. We ask that you respect the fact that we are a religious Jewish website and avoid inappropriate language at all cost.

If you promote any foreign religions, gods or messiahs, lies about Israel, anti-Semitism, or advocate violence (except against terrorists), your permission to comment may be revoked.

No Responses to “…As We Were Saying”

Comments are closed.

SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend

Current Top Story
Gidon Saar Resignation Announcement
Minister Gidon Saar Unexpectedly Announces Resignation
Latest Indepth Stories

A little less than 10 percent of eligible Democratic voters came out on primary day, which translates into Mr. Cuomo having received the support of 6.2 percent of registered Democrats.

The reality, though, is that the Israeli “war crimes” scenario will likely be played out among highly partisan UN agencies, NGOs, and perhaps even the International Criminal Court.

Peace or the lack of it between Israel and the Palestinians matters not one whit when it comes to the long-term agenda of ISIS and other Islamists, nor does it affect any of the long-running inter-Arab conflicts and wars.

Rather than serving as a deterrent against terrorist attacks, Israel’s military strength and capabilities are instead looked at as an unfair advantage in the asymmetrical war in which it finds itself.

Sisi:”The religious nature of the Middle East creates challenges for the governing authorities.”

For too long the media and international community have been preaching that “Palestinians” bear no responsibility for the consequences of their decisions and they are passive victims of the conflict.

Iron Dome intercepted over 1,000 rockets aimed at Israel with a success rate of over 90% in 2014

We talked about the responsibility that comes with the pen, its potential to influence and inspire.

Amnesty International:The crippling of the power station was “collective punishment of Palestinians”

Originally scheduled to be held elsewhere, the hotel canceled, pressured by local missionary groups

It’s likely that some of the rebel factions, including US clients, have indeed made pacts with ISIS

Imam Tafsirli of the Harlem Islamic center: “You cannot be a Muslim without believing in Jesus”

If simple fuel choice were implemented, the power of petroleum and those who sell it would cease.

More Articles from Jason Maoz
Charles Krauthammer

Wye would be seen to have set the groundwork for the creation of a Palestinian state

Presidential-Seal-062014

These are not necessarily the best all-around biographies or studies of the individual presidents listed (though some rank right up there), but the strongest in terms of exploring presidential attitudes and policies toward Israel.

The Clintonan “engagement” liberals remember with such fondness did nothing but embolden Arafat and Hamas and Hizbullah as they witnessed Israel’s only real ally elevate process ahead of policy.

What really makes one wonder about the affinity felt by certain Jews for Grant was the welcome mat he put out for some of the country’s most pernicious anti-Semites.

With 2013 marking half a century since Kennedy’s fateful limousine ride in Dallas, the current revels are exceeding the revisionist frenzies of years past, with a seemingly endless parade of books, articles and television specials designed to assure us that, despite everything that has come to light about him since his death, JFK was a great president, or at least a very good president who would have been great had his life not been so cruelly cut short.

As someone who for the past fifteen years has been writing a column that largely focuses on the news media, I’ve read what is no doubt an altogether unhealthy number of books on the subject. Most of them were instantly forgettable while some created a brief buzz but failed to pass the test of time. And then there were those select few that merited a permanent spot on the bookshelf.

George W. Bush has been getting some positive media coverage lately, with recent polls showing him at least as popular as his successor, Barack Obama, and a big new book about the Bush presidency by New York Times chief White House correspondent Peter Baker (Days of Fire, Doubleday) portraying Bush as a much more hands-on chief executive than his detractors ever imagined.

Readers who’ve stuck with the Monitor over the years will forgive this rerun of sorts, but as we approach the fortieth anniversary of the Yom Kippur War – and with the stench of presidential indecisiveness hanging so heavily over Washington these days – it seemed only appropriate to revisit Richard Nixon’s role in enabling Israel to recover from the staggering setbacks it suffered in the first week of fighting.

Printed from: http://www.jewishpress.com/indepth/media-monitor/as-we-were-saying/2013/07/24/

Scan this QR code to visit this page online: