CNN’s coverage of the disputed West Bank territory, also known as Judea and Samaria, is demonstrably biased against Israelis. One need only contrast how the network covered two recent attacks carried out there – one perpetrated by Israelis and the other by Palestinians.
In the world of journalism, there are understandable errors, and then there are the types of errors that make you wonder whether the journalists are living in the same reality.
Expert analysis, when used properly, can help audiences contextualize factual reporting. But when used improperly, it can mislead audiences by exaggerating or downplaying certain details to fit into a preconceived narrative. Repeatedly, CNN’s investigations have fallen into the latter category by portraying demonstrably biased “experts” as neutral sources.
Good investigative journalism is journalism at its best. Unfortunately, that kind of good journalism is rare at CNN. Rather than producing impartial, professional investigations, many of the network’s journalists are acting as one-sided prosecutors when it comes to Israel.
Why is Jewish violence newsworthy, but not violence against Jews? That is the question to be asked of CNN, at least regarding its coverage of Judea & Samaria.
For a 3,000-word essay following an explosive claim in the headline, very little space is devoted to actual evidence of the central claim: that soldiers “did little” to stop violence in Huwara.
Cobbling together speculation, assumptions, mindreading witnesses, and partisan “experts,” CNN falls far short of proving the serious allegation that Israeli forces deliberately targeted Abu Akleh.
