publishedmedium:the times

  • Covering New War, in Shadow of Old One

    La reconnaissance antérieure par le journal même du monumental fiasco professionnel et moral qu’à constitué sa couverture 2003 de l’#Irak n’y fait strictement rien : le #New_York_Times ne prend au sérieux que les #va-t-en-guerre, notamment #néocons, et a massivement recours aux sources anonymes pour promouvoir une attitude belliqueuse, aussi catastrophiques et mensongers qu’aient pu être leurs opinions et « tuyaux »,

    ... given The Times’s troubled history when it comes to this subject, readers have good reason to be wary about what appears in the paper about military intervention in Iraq. And based on what I am already hearing from them, they are.

    Many readers have complained to me that The Times is amplifying the voices of hawkish neoconservatives and serving as a megaphone for anonymously sourced administration leaks, while failing to give voice to those who oppose intervention.

    I went back with the help of my assistant, Jonah Bromwich, and reread the Iraq coverage and commentary from the past few weeks to see if these complaints were valid. The readers have a point worth considering. On the Op-Ed pages and in the news columns, there have been very few outside voices of those who opposed the war last time, or those who reject the use of force now.

    But the neoconservatives and interventionists are certainly being heard.

    A recent profile of the historian Robert Kagan, a leading proponent of the invasion of Iraq in 2003 who is once more in the news, was one focus of sharp reader criticism. And an Op-Ed article by Anne-Marie Slaughter, another proponent of the Iraq war who says Mr. Obama should use force in Syria, also dismayed some readers.

    Phyllis Bennis, who writes frequently on the Middle East, protested in an email to me: “The appearance is that The Times takes seriously only those who were responsible for the disaster that Iraq has become.” Where, she asked, is the equivalent treatment — “serious, comprehensive, virtually uncritical” — of those who opposed the war and warned of what is coming to pass now?

    And the documentary filmmaker Robert Greenwald put it this way on Twitter: “Another day, another NYT article about a neocon and Iraq! Where are the articles about hundreds of thousands against escalation?”

    I also observed that much of the news reporting continues to reflect The Times’s extraordinary access to administration sources. That is both a competitive advantage and a potential hazard. A reader, Dave Metzger, pointed out one recent front-page article that relied heavily on such unnamed sources. His comment on Twitter dripped with sarcasm: “Iraq lessons learned.”

  • Any growing interest in soccer a sign of nation’s moral decay

    It’s foreign. In fact, that’s the precise reason the Times is constantly hectoring Americans to love soccer. One group of sports fans with whom soccer is not “catching on” at all, is African-Americans. They remain distinctly unimpressed by the fact that the French like it.

    • Soccer is like the metric system, which liberals also adore because it’s European. Naturally, the metric system emerged from the French Revolution, during the brief intervals when they weren’t committing mass murder by guillotine.

    Despite being subjected to Chinese-style brainwashing in the public schools to use centimeters and Celsius, ask any American for the temperature, and he’ll say something like “70 degrees.” Ask how far Boston is from New York City, he’ll say it’s about 200 miles.

    Liberals get angry and tell us that the metric system is more “rational” than the measurements everyone understands. This is ridiculous. An inch is the width of a man’s thumb, a foot the length of his foot, a yard the length of his belt. That’s easy to visualize. How do you visualize 147.2 centimeters?

    #football #sport #USA_being_themselves #wtf #ohmygod #ultraLOL

  • Gerry Goffin, writer of more than 50 pop hits, dies at 75 | The Times

    The lyricist Gerry Goffin, who with his songwriting partner Carole King wrote some of the most memorable hits of the twentieth century, has died at 75.

    They penned more than 50 top 40 hits, mainly in the 1960s, including such classics as Will You Love Me Tomorrow, (You Make Me Feel Like) A Natural Woman, Up on the Roof and The Loco-Motion.

    Spending Time with the Legendary Lyricist Gerry Goffin

    Gerry Goffin (Wikipedia)

    Aujourd’hui la maison d’édition où Gerry Goffing commença sa carrière se spécialise en films série B « historiques »

    La majorité des œuvres sont d’un mauvais goût exquis.

  • Migrants Invisible in UK Media

    A new report published June 13th, 2014 by Migrant Voice reveals huge under-representation of migrants in mainstream British media.

    Migrant Voice analysed 577 online news stories relating to migration over an 11 week period from January to April 2014, from sources including the BBC, ITV, SKY news, The Daily Mail, The Times, The Sun, The Evening Standard, and The Guardian.

    There are some fantastic examples of migrants’ contributions to British life that feature in all of these media outlets, but when we step back and look at the overall data it is clear that migrants’ views are systematically invisible or ignored when it comes to most stories affecting migrants.

    The debate on migration takes place largely within the media, yet migrants themselves are all too often subject to a ’code of silence.’ Migrant Voice works to bring more migrant voices into the debate - voices all too often ignored by politicians or those with ’an axe to grind.’

    Following the launch of the report, Migrant Voice wrote to editors and reporters to ask them to sign up their new ’Meet a Migrant’ Campaign.

    #migration #médias #journalisme #visibilité #UK #Angleterre #silence

  • The CIA Aided Polio’s Comeback–but #Media Have Forgotten the Story

    #Polio had been battled to near-extinction after decades of effort, but this year the WHO confirmed 68 new cases and declared it an international public health emergency. Nearly 80 percent of those cases are in Pakistan.

    Why is this? According to the New York Times’ Donald McNeil Jr. (5/6/14), “Polio has never been eliminated there, Taliban factions have forbidden vaccinations in North Waziristan for years, and those elsewhere have murdered vaccine teams.” McNeil also quotes a WHO spokesperson towards the top of the piece: “So we’re saying to the Pakistanis, the Syrians and the Cameroonians, ’You’ve really got to get your acts together.”’

    The Times underlined the emergency today in an editorial, explaining that Pakistan has such high numbers “largely because Taliban factions have forbidden vaccinations in conservative tribal areas and attacked healthcare workers elsewhere.”

    There’s a crucial piece of information missing here—one that these outlets know full well. In 2011, the British Guardian (7/11/11) reported that the CIA used a fake vaccination drive led by Pakistani Dr. Shakil Afridi to gain entry to bin Laden’s compound and gather DNA to confirm his presence there. As McNeil himself reported in 2012 (7/9/12), that revelation led to suspicion and banning of vaccination teams in the tribal areas of Pakistan. At the time, the WHO argued that, while it was a “setback…unless it spreads or is a very longtime affair, the program is not going to be seriously affected.”

    Then the killings started; the #Times reported several times on killings of polio vaccination workers in Pakistan, noting in June 2013 that these attacks “escalated” after the revelation of the #CIA plot. And the following month, McNeil reported that after Dr. Afridi was sentenced to 33 years in prison for treason, “Anger deepened when American lawmakers called Dr. Afridi a hero and threatened to cut off aid if he was not released.”

    Fast forward to this week, and CBS Evening News (5/5/14) likewise avoided the CIA connection in reporting the most recent story, as anchor Scott Pelley noted: “Most cases are in Pakistan, where vaccine workers have been murdered on suspicion that they’re spying for the United States.”

    The PBS NewsHour (5/6/14) was one of the only outlets that mentioned the CIA issue, in a report by correspondent Jeffrey Brown:

    BROWN: Dr. Anita Zaidi, a pediatrician, cited a fake vaccination campaign that the CIA used in the hunt for Osama bin Laden.

    ZAIDI: Which has hugely damaged public health programs, not only in Pakistan, but in many, many countries, because people ask all kinds of questions. They now think that they might—the vaccine programs might be actually spy operations.

    This story was well-reported in the past, particularly by the Times; why the silence now that the problem has been declared an international emergency?

    #oubli #New_york_times

    • The C.I.A.’s Deadly Ruse in Pakistan

      The C.I.A.’s ruse involved phony door-to-door solicitations by a physician promising to deliver hepatitis B immunizations; his real purpose was to confirm bin Laden’s suspected hiding place. The ploy helped fuel a militant backlash against immunization workers, and as many as 60 health workers and police officers have since been killed.

      Meanwhile, polio is on the rise, with Pakistan accounting for 66 of the 82 cases reported so far this year by the World Health Organization. Last year, there were 93 cases of polio in Pakistan, where the health organization warns that the disease is endemic, as it is in Afghanistan and Nigeria.

      The C.I.A. can no longer seek to “obtain or exploit DNA or other genetic material” gathered this way, according to a promise from the Obama administration. That is small comfort for those suffering the aftereffects of this ruse.

      Convincing wary parents to accept polio vaccination — and finding health workers willing to risk violence — has been made more difficult than ever.


    • un argument qui va un peu dans l’autre sens : les talibans avaient déjà tué, en 2010, des médecins et humanitaires occidentaux (dont un ophtalmo qui travaillait depuis 31 ans dans la région), donc avant l’infâme opération de la CIA :

      Long before there was any CIA involvement, the Taliban and other Islamic extremists were killing vaccine teams and other healthcare workers. Several years ago, ten members of an international assistance mission were killed. The team included six Americans, one German, one Briton and four Afghans. The Taliban claimed “credit” for the murders. One Taliban leader said, “We don’t want any foreigners here. They are not our friends.” This is despite the fact that four of those killed were Afghans, and one of the Americans was an ophthalmologist who had spent thirty-one years in the region, bringing sight to thousands of impoverished villagers.

      comme dit Crawford Kilian (l’auteur de ce blog) : « the phony vaccination scheme simply gave the Taliban a new stick to beat the western dog with »

  • MH370, maintenant disparu des médias… Le rapport préliminaire malaisien a été publié le 1er mai dans l’indifférence la plus totale, puisqu’il ne contient RIEN.

    Malaysia releases preliminary report on MH370 - The Times of India

    Malaysia on Thursday made public a report on Flight MH370 and other data in its most extensive release of information on the airliner yet, but which contained no new clues on what happened to the missing plane.

    The brief five-page report dated April 9, and which was submitted earlier to the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), was mostly a recap of information that had already been released over time.

    It contained no major revelations in what remains one of the greatest mysteries in aviation history.

    Une analyse du rapport par un pilote ayant étudié la disparition du vol AF447 souligne l’incompétence, la désorganisation de la compagnie et du contrôle aériens.

    Incompetence, lost time mar MH370 search, says pilot who wrote about Air France crash - The Malaysian Insider

    The shortcomings exposed in the preliminary report on Malaysia Airlines flight MH370 are disturbing and have raised questions about the competence of the airline’s operations centre, said an Airbus A330 captain who wrote a book on the Air France 447 crash.In his opinion piece in CNN, Bill Palmer said the brief, five-page report, showed that the Malaysian Transport Ministry was still trying to share as little information as possible.

    He said this was especially evident when compared with the extensive detail in preliminary reports from other accidents, such as the loss of Air France Flight 447 in June 2009.

    Il détaille le processus d’alerte en cas de disparition, en trois phases, et souligne que, dans les deux cas, rien n’avait été déclenché.

    He said the investigation of that disappearance [ie AF447] revealed a surprising lack of coordination between air traffic control agencies, their inability to contact each other and clarity on who should be initiating emergency protocols when contact is lost.
    “Many controllers and agencies were asking about the flight, but no one had triggered the uncertainty, alert and distress phases of the process.”

    On en parle sur place, @Aude_V ?

  • Children grab toxic toys as e-waste chokes IT city - The Times of India

    [Children] are paid anywhere between Rs 70 and Rs 120 based on the number of components they manage to separate from the equipment. Adults get paid Rs 500-800 as they work on more complex systems.

    (...) Everybody here wants to be anonymous, but in reality, they work in broad daylight, employing children under the nose of law enforcers.

    #enfants #e-waste #électronique #inde

  • Russia Is Quick to Bend Truth About Ukraine

    Sur 27 paragraphes, 26 sur la propagande russe et 1 sur celui des Atlantistes,

    There is no question that the new Ukrainian government and its Western allies, including the United States, have engaged in their own misinformation efforts at times, with officials in Kiev making bold pronouncements in recent days of enforcement efforts that never materialized. On Tuesday, some American officials were spreading unverified photographs allegedly showing Russian rocket launchers carried by pro-Russian demonstrators in eastern Ukraine.

    • NYT Dishes More Ukraine Propaganda

      The Times’ Herszenhorn has been among the most biased of a long list of biased MSM correspondents who have enforced the false narrative about Ukraine. Indeed, the oppressive “group think” – blending State Department propaganda with its amen chorus of the MSM – has made formulating any rational policy toward Russia and Ukraine politically impossible in Official Washington.

      It seems that the safe career play is always to go for the most extreme examples of Russian perfidy. For instance, in mid-April, the Times published a front-page story by Herszenhorn excoriating Russian Prime Minister Dmitri Medvedev for engaging in clumsy propaganda.

  • A Star Player Accused, and a Flawed Rape Investigation

    The case has unfolded as colleges and universities across the country are facing rising criticism over how they deal with sexual assault, as well as questions about whether athletes sometimes receive preferential treatment. The Times’s examination — based on police and university records, as well as interviews with people close to the case, including lawyers and sexual assault experts — found that, in the Winston case, Florida State did little to determine what had happened.

  • Ousted Libyan PM says preparing return “very soon”

    Former Libyan prime minister #Ali_Zeidan on Tuesday warned that Islamist groups were sabotaging attempts to rebuild his country in order that it become a haven for extremists, in an interview with Britain’s newspaper The Times. Zeidan, who fled to Germany after losing a parliamentary confidence vote earlier this month, said that he was preparing to return “maybe very soon” to help restore order and repel the threat of extremism, two-and-a-half years after the killing of veteran ruler Muammar Gaddafi. read more

    #Libya #Top_News

  • “The Upshot” is the New York Times’ replacement for Nate Silver’s FiveThirtyEight - Quartz

    “The Upshot.” That’s the name the #New_York_Times is giving to its new #data-driven venture, focused on politics, policy and economic analysis and designed to fill the void left by Nate Silver, the one-man traffic machine whose statistical approach to political reporting was a massive success.

    David Leonhardt, the Times’ former Washington bureau chief, who is in charge of The Upshot, told Quartz that the new venture will have a dedicated staff of 15, including three full-time graphic journalists, and is on track for a launch this spring. “The idea behind the name is, we are trying to help readers get to the essence of issues and understand them in a contextual and conversational way,” Leonhardt says. “Obviously, we will be using data a lot to do that, not because data is some secret code, but because it’s a particularly effective way, when used in moderate doses, of explaining reality to people.”

    #sites_de_presse #data_journalism

  • ’A New York Times reporter in Israel is invariably called an anti-Semite or self-hating Jew’


    Clyde Haberman recounts the time a member of Conference of Presidents of Major Jewish Organizations – “A president of something or other,” as he puts it – got up and said: “Every morning when I read you, I get sick to my stomach."

    “Your health is everything,” the veteran New York Times journalist responded. “You should stop reading."

    It is a rare moment of ire in Haberman’s otherwise bemused reflections, over lunch in Manhattan, on his 37 years at the Times and on the four years he spent in the early 1990’s as the paper’s correspondent in Jerusalem. “As if I’m not a human being,” he snarls. “As if I don’t have feelings, so you can call me a no-good, self-hating anti-Semite (several expletives deleted) straight to my face.”

    Haberman, 68, has just parted ways with the Times, much to the regret of legions of fans of the smart New York City columns that he’s written for the past 18 years. Before that he reported for the Times on several major and historic national and international news stories, from Japan to Jerusalem, from the fall of Saddam to the fall of communism, and was also the Times’ bureau chief in Tokyo and Rome.

    But his stint in Israel during the tumultuous days of the Oslo Accords was undoubtedly special for the Orthodox-born-and-raised Haberman, in more ways than one.

    “Throughout my career,” he says, “I’ve had my fair share of “you’re an idiot” letters, but many more letters of praise as well. Israel is the only assignment I ever had in which in four years I never once got a letter that said “nice job.” If I would have gotten one, I would have had it embossed and put it on a wall, like a business does with the first dollar bill it makes.”

    This, he says, is the lot of most New York Times’ reporters in Israel, as well as other prominent American journalists who have agreed to an Israel posting. I ask whether sending a Jewish reporter is hence a good or bad idea. “All other things being equal,” he replies, “it is probably better to send a non-Jew rather than a Jew – just as I would probably prefer to send a non-Indian to India. It’s better to avoid that extra component.”

  • New York Times redesign points to future of online publishing - Jan. 8, 2014

    redesign du site du NYT : les articles écrits par des boîtes de communication et de #publicité sont désormais dans les mêmes flux que les articles des journalistes : le mur est tombé

    Most notably, the redesign introduces fast-growing “native advertising” to The Times is calling these ads Paid Posts. They resemble articles written by reporters — thus they are “native” — but they are actually written by sponsors. Dell is the first purchaser of Paid Posts, and on Wednesday, there were several such posts on the Web site.

    (à noter que c’est aussi ce que fait Quartz)

    #presse #journalisme

  • ABC, NYT Repeatedly Lied About CIA Operative Robert #Levinson

    #ABC et le #New-York-Times ont menti sciemment sur le statut professionnel de Levinson.

    The Times’ report today discloses this timeline; ABC News’ report does not—but a source at the network confirmed to Gawker that ABC reporters discovered the CIA connection in 2007 as well. At the request of the government and Levinson’s family, however, both outlets repeatedly stated, without any caveats, that Levinson was on a “business trip” when he was captured. A review of their coverage indicates that ABC News did so at least 7 times, and the Times at least 3 times.

  • Edward Snowden sharpened his hacking skills in Delhi - The Times of India

    BANGALORE: The hacker who shook the US intelligence machinery and had world leaders railing against Washington for spying on them picked up crucial skills in India. Edward Snowden, the National Security Agency contractor-turned-whistleblower, spent a week in New Delhi training in core Java programming and advanced ethical hacking. It’s this training that got him certified as an EC-Council Certified Security Analyst (ECSA).

    #snowden #prism

  • After Changes, How Green Is The Times ? -

    Beyond quantity, the amount of deep, enterprising coverage of climate change in The Times appears to have dropped, too. In that six-month period this year, there were only three front-page stories in which climate change was the main focus, compared with nine the year before. All three were written by the excellent science reporter Justin Gillis, and two of three were pegged to a specific global warming milestone (the other had to do with President Obama’s policy on the environment). With fewer reporters and no coordinating editor, what was missing was the number and variety of fresh angles from the previous year — such as a September article on what is being revealed beneath that Arctic ice melting at a record pace.

  • A Five-Decade Defense of Food Aid - Timeline -

    Since the beginning of the modern food stamp program in 1964, The Times editorial board has weighed in on major changes and debates and has highlighted its effectiveness in times of need.

    #Etats-Unis #guerre_contre_les_pauvres #bons_alimentaires

  • New York Times Planning [withholding] #NSA Papers

    Snowden reportedly avoided the Times due to its suppressing the ATT-NSA interception program.

    Ellsberg has said even now all of the Pentagon Papers was not released (...). What he does not say is what he was threatened with for full disclosure, what arrangements were negotiated with the USG by him and the Times for their protection against prosecution, and what has become of the full collection of the truncated, branded and lucratively marketed Pentagon Papers.

    Moreover, it has become commonplace for reporting on national security affairs to articulate withholding of material, a cant now recognizable indicator of arrangements to benefit outlets at the cost of full public access. From the Church Committee hearings and All the President’s Men through four decades of the rise of prestigous national security journalism, there has been increasing claims by reporters to play the withholding game, as if responsibility to keepers of government secrecy justifies irresponsibility to public democracy.

    #secret #presse #leaks #whistleblower #contrôle

  • The Times Is Working on Ways to Make Numbers-Based Stories Clearer for Readers

    Concernant les chiffres, le New York Times décide de ne plus en parler isolément sans les mettre en perspective,

    Toward that end, I just finished speaking with David Leonhardt, someone who is well positioned to do something about this. Not only is he the Washington bureau chief, but he also is a Pulitzer Prize-winning economics writer. (...)

    He agrees that there is a problem, and told me that The Times is already working on a solution. A small group of editors is “thinking through a whole set of issues about how we present numbers,” he told me. The results, he said, will probably be determined within a couple of months. They might take the form of new entries to the stylebook, announcements within newsroom departments or e-mails laying out new guidelines to the whole news staff.

    Ceci après une série de critiques,

    And while he noted that the recent pressure for change is “coming from the left,” specifically the economist-writer Dean Baker and – which now has more than 18,000 signatures on a petition — this is not a partisan issue.

    Réaction de Dean Baker,

    Numbers in Context : Big Congrats to the New York Times and Margaret Sullivan

    Anyhow, we will see exactly how the NYT ends up dealing with the issue, but they deserve a great deal of credit for recognizing the problem and trying to address it. Margaret Sullivan, the paper’s public editor, deserves special credit for taking this one on and pressing it with the paper’s edtors. Also Bob Naiman, at Just Foreign Policy, played an important role in initiating a petition at Move-On on this issue, which eventually got almost 19,000 signatures. That’s pretty impressive for the ultimate wonk petition.

  • When the New York Times went to bat for the one-state solution -

    Haaretz, By Sara Hirschhorn | Oct. 15, 2013

    Loath or lust after his ideas, University of Pennsylvania political scientist Ian Lustick created a tempest in a teapot — pardon the idiom, I’m new to Britain — with a recent polemical New York Times op-ed entitled “The Two State Illusion.” In it he heaped opprobrium and a last mound on dirt on the grave of the two-state paradigm and called for consideration of, if not resignation to, the reality of the one-state solution.

    Subsequently, academicians and practitioners across the political spectrum have debated the piece. (The responses include provocative essays by leftist cultural icon Yitzhak Laor in Haaretz, right-leaning Middle East Studies scholar Martin Kramer in Commentary, Arab-American advocate Hussein Ibish and academic Saliba Sarsar of the American Task Force on Palestine in The Daily Beast, left-leaning Jewish intellectual Bernard Avishai in the New Yorker as well as letters to the editor of the Times by Kenneth Jacobson of the Anti-Defamation League and Alan Elsner of JStreet, among others.)

    Seemingly the only “Washington consensus” they can concur with is how wrong Lustick is. Yet while the merits of his argument certainly require further examination, the larger questions about the agenda of the publishers and the audience for this discussion have been largely overlooked — why has Western journalism seemingly been so intent on a campaign to “mainstream” the one-state discourse, and who is really listening?

    Reading Lustick’s editorial myself, I was deeply impressed by his description of the current state of affairs in Israel/Palestine: grim realities, blissful ignorances, misguided optimisms, ingrained inequalities, dangerous fantasies and violent cataclysms. (Full disclosure: I am indebted to his scholarship and assistance in my own research on the Israeli settler movement.) Few have written with such piercing yet empathetic clarity of the dilemmas and delusions of both nations under siege and how (as he wrote in a rebuttal in The Daily Beast) “the illusion” of ultimately achieving two states for two peoples has helped to justify and normalize an interim state of “systematic coercion” and “permanent oppression.”

    Lustick’s is a searing cry to mobilize action that will wrest the “peace process industry” from its collective apathy and acquiescence with the two-state solution. (It should be noted that his vigorous attacks on this “industry” come more from the standpoint of an insider, bearing in mind his role in Middle East policy planning in the State Department and consulting to subsequent administrations, than the putative outsider position he takes.) He seems to be seeking “redemption” for the (retrospective) wisdom ignored by himself and others in the 1980s.

    Yet, while illustrating the vastly different conclusions that political scientists and historians reach, often working with the same raw material of conflict, I consider his conclusions somewhat too “parsimonious” (as the disciplinary lingo would have it); I see the correlation but not the causation in his case study. While undoubtedly the passage of time has failed the two-state solution, this is as much a problem of praxis by politicians as with the theory of nationalist ideology.

    I have yet to see a better solution — complicated by the thin descriptions of workable alternatives in a climate where the only salient scenarios are usually “one nation pushes the other nation into the sea.” Lustick himself is too facile in his willingness to be “untethered” from “Statist Zionism” and “narrow Israeli nationalism,” even if the means to do so will necessarily unleash violence.

    The looming (if not current) expiry for the viability of the “land for peace” rubric and the attractions of power-sharing arrangements notwithstanding, as a Zionist, I’m still not quite ready to be an early adopter in abandoning the state system. Yet, I unabashedly admit that I am what Lustick disparagingly calls the two-state “true believer.” If, as he later suggested, the disciples of the two-state rubric are a group of messianic, faith-based, deus-ex-machina-dependent, self-deluding zealots, in contrast with those converts to the timely, rational, human-agency-enlightened evangelists of the one-state solution, than I suppose I am one of the last doomed members of that fundamentalist cult.

    Yet, the fierce debate over Lustick’s high profile and pull-no-punches argument aside (which are unlikely to be resolved), the larger questions surrounding its agenda and audience remain. Lustick’s piece joins several others in The Times and other major Western media outlets from various perspectives that have sought to mainstream the one-state discourse in journalistic practice. Whether this has backfired or not in reinforcing two-state advocacy remains to be seen, yet there is no doubt that it has achieved a heightened profile and polemic surrounding this paradigm.

    It is not clear, however, whether this agenda is a veritable chicken-and-egg between publishers and politicians to promote one-state alternatives of late, as evidenced by Deputy Defense Minister Danny Danon’s own contribution to The Times a few weeks ago. Further, it remains to be seen whether journalists can (and should?) control the message in the months and years to come, in a hyper-competitive media landscape where the op-ed has become the new global public square.

    Yet, the most important aspect of this agenda is the audience it may — or may not — be reaching. If recent items are representative of broader trends, the debate over Lustick’s piece has largely been confined to the English-language media for the politically aware (on both left and right, including the peace industry that he attacks), leaving out the apolitical indifferent and, most significantly, those actually in the region itself.

    From a brief review of the Hebrew press it seems Lustick’s op-ed barely raised an eyebrow, with a rare column in the center-right daily Maariv dismissing the professor as “no lover of Israel,” one “who doesn’t get the way things are here” (a familiar brush-off that many Americans interested in Israel are subject to), and concluding that “practical Zionism, both in its classic and pragmatic [forms] is still what most Israelis are clinging to,” even if the “broad and tired” problem of the two-state solution requires “hard questions.”

    Haaretz also translated Lustick’s piece into Hebrew, although it appears that some of the most inflammatory passages (the frolicking coalition of Orthodox Jews and Jihadis, Tel Aviv entrepreneurs and fellahin, Mizrahi Jews and their Arab brothers) was redacted for its apparently unprepared Israeli audience. There was scant coverage in the Arabic-language press as well, whether or not because the standard editorial line attacking Israel precluded more substantive discussion.

    For all of the fuss from afar on the one-state idea, from the point of view of the relevant parties they aren’t ready for it (yet). As Lisa Goldman wrote so poignantly of the misguided turn of the discussion about the very issues Lustick so acutely illuminated: “While the debate itself was interesting and sometimes provocative, it seemed to circumvent the real elephant in the room – which was the urgency of the situation on the ground.” Perhaps there is more in heaven and earth than dreamt of in Lustick’s philosophy.

    While I remain a true believer in the two-state solution and hope for its fulfillment, the time has come to at least explore other options for an open, constructive and visionary discussion of the one-state solution. An exploration of both policies, especially given current realities, is not and cannot be mutually exclusive. We must heed Lustick’s call, yet I hope for a conversation that more earnestly honors both Zionist and Palestinian national aspirations and is led by parties to the conflict — and its solution — themselves.

    Dr. Sara Yael Hirschhorn is the new University Research Lecturer and Sidney Brichto Fellow in Israel Studies at Oxford University. Her research, teaching and public engagement activities focus on the Israeli settler movement, the Arab-Israeli conflict and the relationship between the U.S./American Jewry and Israel. She is writing a forthcoming book about American Jews and the Israeli settler movement since 1967.

  • Le billet d’As‘ad Abukhalil de la semaine est presque a-politique : il témoigne de son passage à la lecture des versions électroniques des journaux, et conclut sur les livres électroniques :

    After months of this experience, I can report to you the result. I find that there are changes that occur from digital reading. I find myself reading The Times differently. Given the not-so-good edition of The Times’ application, I still go to the website and read it section by section. That has its advantages and disadvantages: It lets me finish the “International” section without delay and without having to scroll through sections, but it has left me less informed in the Arts and Entertainment section. My reading of The Times has become strategic and not accidental. I used to flip through the pages and would often read an article in a section that is not usually on my radar. But that happens less and less: as I go to the International and then National section, the ability to locate interesting and useful articles in other sections has diminished.

  • Israel and Palestine : Thinking Outside the Two-State Box - Yousef Munayyer

    Ian Lustick had no problem putting the two-state solution in its final resting place this past week, in a lengthy Op-Ed in the Times. If this can open the door to new thinking on a resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian question, the timing could not be better. Identifying the flaws and faults of a two-state solution has been done many times before. What we need now is new thinking on a policy level that grapples both with the failures of the two-state approach and the realities on the ground.

    What is the solution? Standing alone without context, that question is impossible to definitively answer. We must first understand the problem we are trying to solve. And when it comes to resolving the Israeli-Palestinian issue, the two-state solution, which has dominated mainstream discourse on policy toward this issue, is primarily a solution to a problem: Israel’s problem.

    Israel’s problem is one of identity and territory. It claims it is both Jewish and Democratic, and yet, under the control of the Israeli state today, between the river and the sea, there are an equal number of Jews and non-Jews. Those non-Jews, the Palestinians, are either treated as second-class citizens or have no citizenship rights at all.

    The reason for this problem is the implementation of Zionism. The ideology sought to establish a Jewish state, which envisioned and required a Jewish majority. It did so, problematically, in a geographic space where the majority of the native inhabitants were Palestinians Arabs. Every attempt to resolve this conflict between Zionist ideology and demographic reality for the past hundred years has included some form of gerrymandering—drawing oddly shaped, impractical, winding borders around often sparse Jewish populations to encompass them in a single geographic entity. The most recent version of the two-state solution is yet another iteration of these attempts, but with lines drawn a little differently to account for even more illegal Israeli colonists in the West Bank year after year.

    While the two-state solution might provide an answer to Israel’s identity crisis, it does little in terms of solving both the humanitarian and human-rights crisis facing Palestinians. In the best-case scenario, a Palestinian state would be demilitarized and have not a semblance of the sovereignty afforded to every other state in the international system. It would, more or less, be under glorified occupation. Palestinian refugees would not be permitted to return to their homes. The status of Jerusalem, having become so marred by Israeli settlement-building, would likely be indivisible and largely off limits to the Palestinian statelet.

    Cet éditorial extrêmement hétérodoxe arrive après l’op-ed étonnant (qu’il cite) du New York Times que j’avais signalé ici :