Coverage of the September 1996 Arab Riots

 
 
	*  The Inquirer's news correspondents erroneously asserted 
that the Jerusalem tunnel is "adjacent to," "next to," or "along the 
edge of" the dome-shaped Al Aksa mosque.  "Israel Digs Tunnel 
Along Sacred Site," blared a September 25 headline.  It left the 
impression that there was a basis to the absurd Arab claim that the 
tunnel could undermine the foundations of the mosque--an 
allegation that the Inquirer quoted prominently on September 29, 
without interviewing any geologists for an expert opinion.  (Is it 
conceivable that the Inquirer would quote an ignorant politician 
claiming that the SEPTA train tunnel undermines the foundations of 
the William Penn statue--and not interview an expert for a contrary 
view?)  Readers of the Inquirer would have no way of knowing that, 
in fact, the Jerusalem tunnel is hundreds of yards from the 
mosque. 
 
	*  The Inquirer's news reports sought to "understand" the 
violent Arab mobs by blaming the victim for "provoking" the 
attacks.  "Palestinian fury over the derailed peace process escalated 
yesterday..." began Alan Sipress's September 27 dispatch; in 
another, he said the violence was the result of "Arab 
frustration with the peace process derailed by Israel's hard-line 
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu" (the adjective "hard-line" 
appeared in the Inquirer so often that it seemed to be part of 
Netanyahu's name).   
 
	*  Israeli victims of the Arab violence hardly merited serious 
mention in the Inquirer's coverage of the violence.  Typical was a 
September 26 report featuring 7 long paragraphs about Arab rioters 
who were wounded, including interviews with three of them--yet 
not a single interview with any of the hundreds of Israelis who were 
injured in the Arab attacks.  On September 26 the Inquirer ran a 
long, 27-paragraph news story about the violence, generously 
quoting Arab allegations against Israel, but alloting Prime Minister 
Netanyahu just one brief sentence to reply, buried in the very last 
paragraph of the article. 
 
	*  Another theme of the Inquirer's coverage of the riots was 
the notion that many Israelis blame the Netanyahu government for 
provoking the Arabs.  A lengthy September 27 report by Sipress 
quoted a number of Israeli newspapers or columnists who have 
criticized the government; yet he did not cite any of the 
many columnists who have supported the government.  On 
September 30, the Inquirer featured a large front-page photograph 
of an anti-Netanyahu rally by Peace Now; yet it failed to print any 
photos of the pro-Netanyahu rallies that were held.  Inquirer 
correspondent Barbara Demick reporting from Jerusalem on 
September 30 about the divisions among Israelis regarding 
government policy, although from Demick's report it was hard to 
see what divisions there are, since nearly all of those she chose to 
interview were against the government, including an editor of the 
pro-Labor Jerusalem Report, a leader of Peace Now, 
three other leftwing political activists and a college student.  The 
only two dissenters were an Israeli shopkeeper who said Netanyahu 
"is right" but was not given the chance to explain why, and a student 
who said the Arabs had picked an "idiotic reason" for their riot, but 
was not given space to explain his point. 
 
	(Ms. Demick noted that "no opinion polls have been 
published since the outbreak of violence," as if that somehow 
justified her lopsided presentation of Israeli public opinion.  But the 
day after Demick's article appeared in the Inquirer, the Israeli daily 
Ma'ariv published a poll that found 65% of Israelis believe it was a 
mistake for Israel to have permitted the PLO police to bear 
weapons.  Regarding the controversial Jerusalem tunnel exit, 60.5% 
of Israelis said it should remain open; only 39.5% agreed with the 
PLO's demand to seal it up.  The Inquirer did not report the results 
of the Ma'ariv poll.)  

Back to Home Page