One of the jobs of the media is to ask powerful people hard questions, to follow up provocative or erroneous statements and see where they lead. When I read or hear such statements being blithely unchallenged, it makes me angry - and it makes me equally angry no matter which side of any particular question the person involved is on.
I had one such moment when a houseguest and I were listening to NPR's Morning Edition - I'd tell you all about it, but it's easiest to just print the text of the complaint letter I sent to NPR:
(below the fold)
---
To the editors and producers:
On the June 21st edition of All Things Considered, an Israeli politician argued that for the Palestinians to seek full membership in the UN would be invalid because "a state must be established through negotiation." Your reporter did not ask the obvious question, which was "So who established the state of Israel?" The answer, in case your reporter did not know this, was "The United Nations, without any negotiation with the people living in Palestine."
I can only think of two reasons that your reporter did not ask that question: they were ignorant of the history of the region to the degree that they can not cover it intelligently, or they had obtained access to the official on the condition that they ask no question that he did not want to answer. If there is some other reason that obvious and vital question was not asked, I would be delighted to know what it is, and so would every listener whose jaw dropped when the Israeli politician made that assertion and your reporter did not follow up.
I listen to NPR because I expect that complex stories will be examined, awkward questions asked, and I have noticed a consistent failure to do so when it comes to this story. Please read this letter in your listener feedback portion of the news this week, and please get that Israeli politician on the phone, ask him the followup question that your reporter did not, and broadcast his answer - or if he refuses to answer, inform your audience of his refusal.
Thank you,
(PoliticallyNonEuclidean)
---
I received this answer from them:
---
Response to Message #315683:
Dear (PoliticallyNonEuclidean) ,
We appreciate your sharing your concern about our coverage of the Middle East with us. Your thoughts will be taken into consideration.
NPR is committed to bringing listeners thorough and accurate reporting of news in the Middle East. Whether its stories about the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan or the long standing Israeli/Palestinian conflict, our goal is to provide in-depth and balanced coverage of the issues. There is no room for bias in our organization.
What you hear on the air, or on NPR.org, is governed by a strong code of ethics and practices. These standards are in place to protect and support the integrity, impartiality and conduct of our journalists. We encourage you to review the code, which is posted online at http://www.npr.org/....
Additionally, in an effort to continually monitor the way we cover the Middle East, NPR has hired a freelance researcher to conduct quarterly reviews of our coverage. The reports are prepared by John Felton, a former foreign affairs reporter and NPR foreign editor who covered international affairs and U.S. policy for more than 30 years, and submitted to NPR’s ombudsman. To review the reports, please visit http://www.npr.org/.... Also, NPR's ombudsman, who serves as an independent advocate for listeners, often reviews Mideast coverage questions and concerns in her online column. You can read the Ombudsman’s columns here: http://www.npr.org/....
We, again, thank you for your feedback.
Sincerely,
Alan
NPR Services
---
As you might notice, there is nothing here that answers my question; it is probably a form letter that gets sent out to anybody who sends in any comment or complaint about coverage of the Mideast. I sent this message back:
---
Dear Alan,
I am not sure if this is a form letter that you send out to all people who write about Israel/Palestinian issues or whether you actually read my letter, but you did not answer my question: why did the reporter not ask the question about Israel being founded by the very method that Israelis now say is invalid when the Palestinians resort to it? Do you not see the contradiction here? If you do, will you contact that official and ask that question? I know I am not the only one who thinks that the failure to ask this question is a serious failure of reportage.
Thank you,
(PoliticallyNonEuclidean)
---
No answer has been received, probably because they don't have a form letter for this.
I am not a partisan of either side here - I used to regard myself as a supporter of Israel but have become disgusted by their treatment of the people under occupation. I have never been a partisan of the Arab states around Israel either, because they are also serial abusers of human rights. The only difference between the two is that my tax dollars are going to support Israel, and the ambassador from my country to the UN claims to be speaking in the name of all Americans while defending the right of the Israelis to deny the Palestinians a state in which they may live in peace while not subject to Israeli confiscation of land and water.
NPR and every other news organization should ask Israeli politicians these questions directly:
1. Why does a country created by the UN deny the right of the UN to create a country for the Palestinians on land that is outside the internationally recognized borders of the state of Israel?
2. If, as the Israeli politician asserted, a state is only valid if established via negotiation, who negotiated on behalf of the Palestinians who lived there when Israel was established?
3. If a state can only be established at the conclusion of negotiations, what is to prevent one side from "negotiating" forever without any intention of ever coming to a conclusion?
Those are the questions - what are the answers? We don't know, because you didn't ask.