JERUSALEM (Mennonite Mission Network) – Israeli TV showed an interview with the Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert soon after the rockets began flying across the Israeli-Lebanese border.
He was speaking in English so I knew he was targeting a foreign audience. He told how terrible things are, how terrorists made life hell for Israelis and were destroying cities like Haifa and Nahariya.
“All those rockets on Haifa created such destruction … you would not recognize our city,” he said. “And in Nahariya [near the Lebanese border] they have sent in so many rockets, you would not recognize that city.” He clearly needed to justify the issue of “disproportionate use of force,” which hurt the Israeli government image badly.
Well, Mr. Prime Minister, I’ve caught you! I was in Haifa myself two nights before that interview, having dinner on the sidewalk downtown, overlooking the famous Baha’i shrine in one direction and the Mediterranean waterfront in the other. After dinner I drove around town, wanting to see the war ruins for myself – but not sure where to find them. I knew from reports that there had been rockets fired near the oil storage areas, etc. But in all of my driving around, I was not able to find any damage.
Now, I’m sure that wherever the rockets did land, there is a destroyed building which I didn’t see. And large potholes, which haven’t been filled in yet on the streets where incoming rockets landed, would have shown me real war damage. Yes, people were killed and property was destroyed. It was dreadful. But to paint a scene so exaggerated does not honour the leader of a country.
Olmert is not guilty alone. Reports of skewed reporting on both sides of the conflict have surfaced with disturbing frequency: A freelance photographer who submitted material used by Reuters news agency was fired after it was learned that he had altered photographs to add a more dramatic effect for the story.
The problem of staging photographs – creating a more compelling or heart-wrenching image by enhancing the setting of the photograph – is another misuse of reporting that has been part of this conflict. As an example, scenes of bombed buildings in Lebanon might have been enough to get the story told. But by placing a few children’s toys on top of the rubble, a photographer added an element of pathos that was not the true picture.
TV coverage, newspaper and magazine stories – and even the newsletters from NGOs and church-based organizations – have fallen into the trap: how to get the attention of their audience? An old story says that TV producers planning their lead story for the evening news remind each other, “If it doesn’t bleed, it doesn’t lead!”
Far too much reporting – accurate though it may be for what is actually being covered – remains distorted from the whole view. If the rest of the story were told, it would be less interesting.
Who really needed to know that the largest part of Israel was not affected militarily at all, and that people went about their normal routines, including watching TV news coverage that focused exclusively on the narrow version of what was happening? Downtown Beirut was the object of serious attacks and heavy damage, but the largest part of the city was untouched, a fact not known to most from the news reports that were filed.
No wonder most tour and study groups panicked and cancelled their trips to the Middle East. Those who came couldn’t believe that it wasn’t the way they expected. Let me be very clear: terrible things happened to many people, houses and businesses were destroyed, and lives were lost. But my point is that, by telling only one part of the story, the rest of the world was painted a scene that was false by its incompleteness.
Once again, truth was a victim of a war.
Glenn Edward Witmer is a Mennonite Mission Network and Mennonite Church Canada Witness worker in Jerusalem. This story first appeared in his monthly MennoLetter from Jerusalem.