Ineffectual Intimidation

Journalism is a tough gig. Do not get me wrong, it is an extremely privileged role and one that any reasonable human being would very much treasure. However, you receive no training for the bombardment of abuse that follows much of what you put out there. There is no opportunity to reply to criticism – unless you wish to be labelled unprofessional – and there is no follow-up window in which to provide your evidence and justify yourself to detractors. You merely have to take it on the chin.

Recently, legendary veteran Middle East correspondent Robert Fisk found himself at the centre of a journalistic storm when his article concerning the Syrian trial of 48 medical professionals was lambasted by Syrian officials. With threats to sue his newspaper, The Independent, for libel and potential to ruin what must surely be one of journalism’s greatest careers, this incident brought to light the serious repercussions that result from ones writing.

Writing on the affairs of the Middle East, rather unsurprisingly, leads to insults. People with a difference of opinion challenge your viewpoint and angrily defend what they believe to be correct. There are ample examples. Take Fisk’s latest predicament. Or my own recent skirmish with a pro-Israeli website. Following an article I wrote, “Transparent and Trustworthy Israel“, I found myself featured heavily on anti-semitism.net. My article had been well and truly analysed and scrutinised. No stone left unturned. Lazy attempts were made to tag me as anti-Semitic and anti-Jewish. This was nothing more than an ineffectual effort to intimidate.

But why should I have been surprised. Journalists such as the brilliant Israeli reporter Gideon Levy have been dealing with this treatment relentlessly for over a decade now. He has been shot at and terrorised for merely speaking the truth and detailing the appalling situation in the Israeli-occupied areas of Gaza and the West Bank. My episode is not worthy of comparison. Nevertheless, it is the nearest I have come to the brutal realities of the Israeli propaganda network; hard at work in their efforts to silence truth-tellers.

In respect of Robert Fisk’s case, a story today provided abundant proof that what he had spelt out in his article last month was nothing but stark reality. Al Jazeera, in their reports on anti-government demonstrations taking place in Yemen, revealed how the crowds were chanting “tell Saudi Arabia that Yemen is a republic” and “Yemen is not Bahrain”. These protests act as evidence to Fisk’s – and my – claims that Bahrain is being ‘occupied’ by the Saudis. It is clearly a sentiment felt throughout the Middle East. There is no denying now.

Worse still, critics of journalists fail to gather any concrete proof to their claims despite aiming hypocritical criticism at the fact-collecting of their victims. To criticise Mr Fisk for not knowing the Middle East inside-out is preposterous. And to accuse me of being anti-Jewish without evidence is disgraceful. My issue is not with the majority of Israelis – who, on the whole, support my views – but with the malfeasant government that continues to torment and abuse the people of Palestine.

No matter how much abuse I receive, and however much intimidation is thrown my way, I shall never stop telling it as it is. A journalist’s number one priority should be to challenge those in power and stick up for the ‘little’ people. The voiceless. The victims. Not enough mainstream journalism is about that. Conflicts are treated and reported as if they were sporting events. Equal time offered to both sides. Equal admiration and denouncements. No ‘bias’ – a word I am sick of hearing – or subjectivity.

Instead, warfare needs to be emotionally conveyed. We are not robots. If we witness death and destruction, then what is so wrong with reporting it with passion and feeling? Why can we not state who the perpetrator is and provide a voice to the sufferers? Perhaps I am unprofessional. Too attached to my work. Perhaps I ought to transform myself into a robot, possess a completely neutral state of mind and merely report uncritically. Thankfully for my employers – and readers – this is not something I intend to do.

9 thoughts on “Ineffectual Intimidation”

  1. I think you may be incorrect. Unless I am mistaken, it was the Bahraini trial of medics that Mr Fisk’s article refered to not Syrian….

  2. Abuse usually indicates an absence of counter-argument.so can be considered relucutant praise. It shows you are doing something right.

  3. If anyone here believes Fish is not totally biased in regards to his statements , past and present regarding Israel , and their positions against Israel in just about every issue ….then I 've got a bridge to sell in Brooklyn .Syria's a red herriung in your article Scott , and if somehow you get lumped in with Fisk , it's because there's journalististic proof.

  4. p.s. Scott , you are indeed NOT expected to have "a neutral state of mind " , but as a journalist which you claim to be , you ARE expected to report NEUTRALLY and OBJECTIVELY , and if " you don't intend to " then prhaps your employer shoulsd take a better look at you . Unfortunately nothing can be said for your "readers " they are fed what they are looking for , what you supply them with , and if that is anything less than neutral objective UNCRITICAL reporting ……then that doesn't say much for your readership .

  5. I wouldn't expect you to be "amused " …..just exposed for the bigots that you are . P.s. have no idea what or who HASBARA is , go out and try to buy some intelligence , FOOL .

  6. Ignore facts and massage your anti-Israel bias , suck up what is offered you by jaded journalists .

  7. p.s. I have no idea who or what HASBARA is . However ,I do know ,you ignore facts and reality inj favor of feeding your bias .

Comments are closed.