Media+Bias+in+Coverage+of+Israel-Palestine.

"Media Bias in Coverage of Israel-Palestine." //Israel/Palestine Mission Network of the Presbyterian Chruch, (USA)//. Web. 14 Sep. 2010. []. Media coverage
 * 1)  "Numerous observers identify, like President Carter, a pervasive, persistent bias in news and analysis on Israel-Palestine, yielding coverage that is more favorable to Israel than to the Palestinians. Credible analysts do not speak in gross, general terms of an orchestrated "Zionist conspiracy" to manipulate and control the media; rather they point to an array of conditions which, taken together, serve to skew coverage of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict in Israel’s favor."
 * 2)  "Three academics from major American universities were engaged by the Jewish Federation of Metropolitan Chicago to examine coverage of Israel/Palestine in the //Chicago Tribune//, //New York Times//, and //Washington Post//. Contrary to the expectations of the Federation, the study found a tendency among all three papers to use language “aligned with an Israeli perspective on events.”
 * 3)  "Writing in the //Jerusalem Post//, Israeli analyst Efraim Inbar candidly warns that “wars are won, not only in the battlefield, but also with words. A small country such as Israel cannot afford to lose the support of the West.”
 * 4)  "Israel’s attempts to win the war of public opinion—and, consequently, to maintain its freedom to implement violent, repressive policies toward the Palestinians without negative repercussions from the world community"
 * 5)  "The problem is not about Israel’s image, but Israel’s policies themselves. Nevertheless, Israel continues to expend vast resources on simultaneous militarization and public relations campaigns."
 * 6)  "Recognizing the negative perception of Israel in the wake of the December 2008-January 2009 Gaza offensive, the Israeli Foreign Ministry has been granted an extra $2 million to improve Israel's image through cultural and information diplomacy."
 * 7)  "Israel’s spokespersons, enjoying the support of a well-organized pro-Israel base in the US have, to date, succeeded brilliantly in “easing the outside pressures” on Israel while cementing the relationship between Israel and the US, Israel’s primary source of political, economic, and military support."
 * 8)  "During decades of territorial expansionism, institutionalized oppression, and disproportionate violence toward the Palestinians, Israel has commanded unwavering support from the US government; the few mild criticisms issued by US officials about specific Israeli policies have remained unenforced by any substantive punitive consequences."
 * 9)  "The Government of Israel restricts news organizations’ and journalists’ access to the occupied Palestinian territories and Gaza, an action that attracted unprecedented attention during the December 2008-January 2009 Gaza offensive."
 * 10)  "Worse yet, dozens of journalists and photographers, most of them Palestinians working for Western news organizations, have been targeted and killed or severely wounded by Israeli military forces in their military offensives within the territories and Lebanon over the years."
 * 11)  "It is indisputable, in any case, that the representation of Jewish journalists within the US media is vastly disproportionate compared to that of Arabs and Muslims, who are generally assumed to be sympathetic to the Palestinian struggle."
 * 12)  "Israel’s public relations and media war is assisted by organizations (15) and individuals within the US who are poised to deploy themselves to “make the case for Israel” and discredit that country’s critics."
 * 13)  "US news organizations often fail the “balance test” by reporting in sympathetic detail on Israeli casualties while generalizing or dehumanizing Palestinian casualties and transmitting without verification Israel’s description of their activities. Then again, those same news outlets fail the “balance test” by implying parity when parity doesn’t exist, as in reporting on Palestinian casualties.(13)"
 * 14)  "Emotionally-charged language or euphemistic terminology is often used to prejudice perception. For instance, Israel’s preferred terms, “security barrier” and “anti-terrorism fence” are employed by many US news outlets, obscuring the barrier’s function in Israeli settlement expansion and concomitant Palestinian territorial dispossession.(4)"
 * 15)  "Palestinians resisting Israel’s illegal occupation are typically referred to as “terrorists,” “militants,” or “gunmen,” while Israeli soldiers engaged in illegal activities—even war crimes—are referred to simply as “soldiers.” Israeli violence is described as being a “response” to Palestinian actions, while Palestinian actions are, according to their perpetrators, usually initiated in response to specific acts of Israeli violence and human rights violations."
 * 16)  "Coverage of settler violence against Palestinians in the West Bank (almost never described as “terrorism”), is rarely covered in the US media. Palestinian militancy, by contrast, is accentuated. Meanwhile, the existence of coordinated Palestinian nonviolent resistance goes virtually unreported. There is little mention in the media, for instance, of protests against Wall construction and land confiscation occurring routinely in the West Bank, at which internationals and Israelis join Palestinian initiated demonstrations that are routinely met with violence from Israeli military and police."
 * 17) <span style="0in: 0in 0in 0pt; display: block; mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .5in;"> "Because the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has long been presented as a just quest for Jewish nationhood hindered by an unfortunate, intractable “Palestinian problem,” media coverage stresses how “the problem” affects the Israeli people."