Israeli censor wielding great power

[TranceNRG]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060719/...N5bnN1YmNhdA--


By BENJAMIN HARVEY, Associated Press Writer Wed Jul 19, 7:30 PM ET

JERUSALEM - Here's some news you may never hear about
Israel's war against Hezbollah: a missile falls into the sea, a strategic military installation is hit, a Cabinet minister plans to visit the front lines.

All these topics are subject to review by Israel's chief military censor, who has — in her own words — "extraordinary power." She can silence a broadcaster, block information and put journalists in jail.

"I can, for example, publish an order that no material can be published. I can close a newspaper or shut down a station. I can do almost anything," Col. Sima Vaknin said Wednesday.

Israel believes that as a small country in a near constant state of conflict, having a say over what information gets out to the world is vital to its security. Critics say the policy is a slippery slope not fit for a democracy.

The range of issues subject to censorship in the latest conflict with Lebanese guerrillas are all related to the goal of preventing Hezbollah from using the media to help it better aim rockets at Israel.

The Associated Press has agreed, like other organizations, to abide by the rules of the censor, which is a condition for receiving permission to operate as a media organization in Israel.

Reporters are expected to censor themselves and not report any of the forbidden material. This story was not submitted to a censor. When in doubt, they can submit a story to the censor who will hand it back, possibly with deletions. The AP will note in a story if any deletions have been made. If a reporter violates the rules, he or she suffers the consequences.

The rules include no real-time reports giving the exact locations of guerrilla missile hits; no reports of missile hits — or misses — on strategic targets; and no reports telling when citizens are allowed to leave their bunkers for supplies.

Journalists are also not allowed to give details about senior Israeli officials going to the north, where Hezbollah's rockets are falling, until the officials have left the area. They also cannot report places where there aren't enough shelters or where public defense is weak.

So far in this conflict, about one rocket in 100 fired by Hezbollah has killed an Israeli. The rest usually explode in empty fields, tear concrete from abandoned streets or plunk into the Mediterranean. Fired blind, Hezbollah's thousands of mostly short-range, inaccurate munitions simply pose a random peril to Israeli citizens.

For obvious reasons, Israel would like to keep it that way. But live media feedback, the censor says, changes everything.

If a news outlet reports immediately that a missile splashed into the sea, for example, any guerrilla with an Internet connection knows to aim left. Report that an oil refinery in Haifa went up in flames, and Hezbollah will surely celebrate and reload. Report that a senior official is headed north, and rockets will be raining down in no time.

Or so goes the logic of censorship.

But in an era when mobile phones have cameras and the terrorists' weapons include laptops and video crews, even the chief censor acknowledges that a complete blockade of news is in many cases not possible.

"Not in 2006," she says.

Restrictions on the media are not unique to Israel. The United States military makes journalists embedded with troops in
Iraq sign a document agreeing not to report specifics of troop movements and attacks in real time, for reasons similar to Israel's.

Critics say the censorship system is worse than ineffective — it's undemocratic, often counterproductive and a violation of freedom of speech.

"People are entitled to get as much information as they can about what's happening in a conflict," says Rohan Jahasekera, associate editor of the London-based magazine, the Index of Censorship.

Israel's censorship rules are not unusual, he adds, but "it's unusual in that they're enforced."

Jahasekera also disputed arguments that reporting missile landings helped Hezbollah, since the rockets the Islamic militants use are "spectacularly inaccurate."

Bob Steele, Nelson Scholar for Journalism Values at the Poynter Institute, a media studies organization, says editors should bear the responsibility for decisions to publish or not.

"These are decisions that the news organizations and journalists should make with the input of government and military officials," he said. "They should not be decisions that are made by default."

"We should always push back on censorship," Steele adds, even if it's a losing fight

[TranceNRG]

Does that mean that everything we hear on CNN, FOX or other western news agencies that come from Israeli sources may not be true?

WHO would have THUNK it?

[Always Upset]

This is absurd.

Have fun with your tin foil hat you islamic conspiracy nut.


God Bless Israel!

[TranceNRG]

Originally Posted by Always Upset

This is absurd.

Have fun with your tin foil hat you islamic conspiracy nut.

God Bless Israel!

Tin foil?
hmmm
It may be haraam to wear tin foil hats in Islam, let me ask SK.


Don't get chocked at me, I just posted the news from Reuters.

[MantisShrimp]

As you know I am pro-Israel, and even I find the American press nauseating. I can only stand news from Britain sometimes, or coming from the actual people and media in the country where the problem is occurring. Ironically sites like youtube are a great resource too, try a video search for "Beirut" or "Haifa" and then sort by upload date or alternately the number of views, and you will get to see some videos of anecdotal experience on the ground in both areas.

I hate being bull****ted. I don't like loaded words, over-interpretation, speculation, etc. I want the true facts. Which is why I like Wikipedia--if a topic is worth arguing over, if someone tries to throw up some bias, someone from the other side will be watching the page, and will throw up a NPOV tag and then you can read their bias on the talk page.

[TranceNRG]

Originally Posted by MantisShrimp

As you know I am pro-Israel, and even I find the American press nauseating. I can only stand news from Britain sometimes, or coming from the actual people and media in the country where the problem is occurring. Ironically sites like youtube are a great resource too, try a video search for "Beirut" or "Haifa" and then sort by upload date or alternately the number of views, and you will get to see some videos of anecdotal experience on the ground in both areas.

I hate being bull****ted. I don't like loaded words, over-interpretation, speculation, etc. I want the true facts. Which is why I like Wikipedia--if a topic is worth arguing over, if someone tries to throw up some bias, someone from the other side will be watching the page, and will throw up a NPOV tag and then you can read their bias on the talk page.

well said.

[1devil]

Originally Posted by TranceNRG

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060719/...N5bnN1YmNhdA--


By BENJAMIN HARVEY, Associated Press Writer Wed Jul 19, 7:30 PM ET

JERUSALEM - Here's some news you may never hear about
Israel's war against Hezbollah: a missile falls into the sea, a strategic military installation is hit, a Cabinet minister plans to visit the front lines.

All these topics are subject to review by Israel's chief military censor, who has — in her own words — "extraordinary power." She can silence a broadcaster, block information and put journalists in jail.

"I can, for example, publish an order that no material can be published. I can close a newspaper or shut down a station. I can do almost anything," Col. Sima Vaknin said Wednesday.

Israel believes that as a small country in a near constant state of conflict, having a say over what information gets out to the world is vital to its security. Critics say the policy is a slippery slope not fit for a democracy.

The range of issues subject to censorship in the latest conflict with Lebanese guerrillas are all related to the goal of preventing Hezbollah from using the media to help it better aim rockets at Israel.

The Associated Press has agreed, like other organizations, to abide by the rules of the censor, which is a condition for receiving permission to operate as a media organization in Israel.

Reporters are expected to censor themselves and not report any of the forbidden material. This story was not submitted to a censor. When in doubt, they can submit a story to the censor who will hand it back, possibly with deletions. The AP will note in a story if any deletions have been made. If a reporter violates the rules, he or she suffers the consequences.

The rules include no real-time reports giving the exact locations of guerrilla missile hits; no reports of missile hits — or misses — on strategic targets; and no reports telling when citizens are allowed to leave their bunkers for supplies.

Journalists are also not allowed to give details about senior Israeli officials going to the north, where Hezbollah's rockets are falling, until the officials have left the area. They also cannot report places where there aren't enough shelters or where public defense is weak.

So far in this conflict, about one rocket in 100 fired by Hezbollah has killed an Israeli. The rest usually explode in empty fields, tear concrete from abandoned streets or plunk into the Mediterranean. Fired blind, Hezbollah's thousands of mostly short-range, inaccurate munitions simply pose a random peril to Israeli citizens.

For obvious reasons, Israel would like to keep it that way. But live media feedback, the censor says, changes everything.

If a news outlet reports immediately that a missile splashed into the sea, for example, any guerrilla with an Internet connection knows to aim left. Report that an oil refinery in Haifa went up in flames, and Hezbollah will surely celebrate and reload. Report that a senior official is headed north, and rockets will be raining down in no time.

Or so goes the logic of censorship.

But in an era when mobile phones have cameras and the terrorists' weapons include laptops and video crews, even the chief censor acknowledges that a complete blockade of news is in many cases not possible.

"Not in 2006," she says.

Restrictions on the media are not unique to Israel. The United States military makes journalists embedded with troops in
Iraq sign a document agreeing not to report specifics of troop movements and attacks in real time, for reasons similar to Israel's.

Critics say the censorship system is worse than ineffective — it's undemocratic, often counterproductive and a violation of freedom of speech.

"People are entitled to get as much information as they can about what's happening in a conflict," says Rohan Jahasekera, associate editor of the London-based magazine, the Index of Censorship.

Israel's censorship rules are not unusual, he adds, but "it's unusual in that they're enforced."

Jahasekera also disputed arguments that reporting missile landings helped Hezbollah, since the rockets the Islamic militants use are "spectacularly inaccurate."

Bob Steele, Nelson Scholar for Journalism Values at the Poynter Institute, a media studies organization, says editors should bear the responsibility for decisions to publish or not.

"These are decisions that the news organizations and journalists should make with the input of government and military officials," he said. "They should not be decisions that are made by default."

"We should always push back on censorship," Steele adds, even if it's a losing fight

You funny. Hezbollah is notoriously secretive. In fact until very recently journalists were never even allowed to view many Hezbollah positions. For the first time recently they took Journalists through some of their hardest hit neighborhoods. However, this was strictly for the purpose of drumming up international sypathy for them. Give this **** a rest. It's pathetically transparent.

[NuggzTheNinja]

Originally Posted by TranceNRG

Does that mean that everything we hear on CNN, FOX or other western news agencies that come from Israeli sources may not be true?

WHO would have THUNK it?

That article says that they were censoring minor details for security reasons.

Specific locations where defense is weak, specific locations where personalities may be traveling, they don't want the press to give Hezbollah intelligence.

Or would you prefer that they loosen their lips so Hezbollah can fire their terrorist rockets more accurately?

[xer0xed]

Military info/tactics shouldn't be made known to the public until some time after, when its usefulness/risk have decayed. This is the case everywhere. When you allow the enemy to know certain information through the press during the time of war, you weaken yourself strategically.

*gasp* OH MY GAWD! Hezbollah doesn't know when Israeli citizens are outside of their bunkers! The horror!

[MantisShrimp]

Are any of the mods jewish? It's be a hoot if they locked this
Oh wait...in keeping with the theory 99.9% of the mods must be jewish

[sumguy]

This reminds me of that FOX reporter explaining the Isreali movements, when they start to shoot at him

[MantisShrimp]

Originally Posted by sumguy

This reminds me of that FOX reporter explaining the Isreali movements, when they start to shoot at him

Wouldn't you? That channel is an insult to the intelligence of anyone with an IQ over 40. Agitprop central.