Battle Lines - the American Media and the Intifada

An experienced journalist analyzes the American media in action and reveals how the media is manipulated by its own needs and by technology and how it in turn manipulates the policies of governments.

The author has covered the Middle East for more than 23 years for the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation and National Public Radio. Here he zeros in on the first five months (December 1987-April 1988) of the Palestinian uprising, scrutinizing the media's interaction with domestic and international politics. He raises disturbing questions about political crisis management, the role of foreign reporters and the nature of their responsibility, the powerful ability of TV news to manipulate images and send subliminal messages. After reviewing hundreds of nightly newscasts, wire-service dispatches and U.S. and Israeli newspaper accounts, Lederman concludes, "There's no question that the U.S. foreign press played the leading role in raising the subject of the uprising as a matter for international debate, or that the Israelis and Palestinians sought to exploit the media's interpretation of events as rallying points." His thoughtful book is recommended for those concerned with the relationships among the media, the military and policy makers.
Copyright 1992 Reed Business Information, Inc.

A steely-eyed look at the ways in which American print and TV newscasters handled (and apparently mishandled) the Palestinian demonstrations that, starting in December 1987, rocked the occupied zones of Israel and Lebanon for more than a year. Writing from a background of 23 years of reporting in the Mideast, including 14 years as NPR's Israel correspondent, Lederman provides not only the details of the Intifada but a clear and cogent wrap-up of the convoluted background of the Palestinian- Israeli confrontation. Happily, the author eschews the political and professional pieties of his colleagues. He finds, for example, that TV coverage of the crisis was almost without fail shallow and frequently self-serving. Lederman is particularly incensed by the medium's attempt to shape American foreign policy, as it did, he charges, when covering George Shultz's 1988 peacemaking efforts. He describes Israeli authorities as consistently arrogant and xenophobic, suspicious and quick to take offense when criticisms are leveled at their policies and actions--and then goes on to depict Yasir Arafat's PLO as disorganized and opportunistic, more interested in publicity than in real achievements and more caring about expatriate Palestinians than those living in the occupied areas. An epilogue briefly discusses media coverage of the Gulf War; CNN gets high marks for its objectivity and depth. Stimulating, straight-from-the-shoulder analysis. -- Copyright ©1991, Kirkus Associates, LP. All rights reserved.

Readers looking for heroes in this analysis of Palestinian intifada media reporting won't find them here. Lederman, a veteran foreign correspondent based in Jerusalem, contends that the American media, Israeli government, and internal Palestinian factions all contributed to misleading news consumers. Lederman analyzed the coverage of the first year of the intifada by the three major broadcast networks, three newspapers, and the Associated Press. He expertly weaves a discussion of topics such as subliminal messages, agenda setting, censorship, intimidation, and "imagespeak," and argues for teaching "visual literacy." He also demonstrates what happens when old ideas are applied with new technologies. Some similar views appear in former Israeli press officer Ze'ev Chafets's lively, pre-intifada Double Vision: How the Press Distorts America's View of the Middle East ( LJ 9/15/84). Recommended for journalism and international affairs collections.
- Bruce Rosenstein, "USA Today" Lib., Arlington, Va.
Copyright 1992 Reed Business Information, Inc.