‘Fairness and balance’ in P&I reporting on the Middle East
Nov 19, 2024
Discussion about the Middle East is difficult. Conflicting views are deeply held and even reasonable people struggle to speak, and to listen, dispassionately and with respect.
Publishers have a right to take a position on the issues but also have a responsibility to support informed discussion that is fair and has a degree of balance. I am pleased that P&I has agreed to publish this article, hoping this reflects commitment to contribute responsibly to public interest journalism across all the issues it covers.
Small on-line publications like P&I face challenges in abiding by professional standards for public interest journalism such as the Australian Press Council’s General Principles. But for contributors like me, the publication abiding by some such standards is important.
Which is why I am writing about P&I’s reporting on Middle East issues, particularly the conflict between Israel and Hamas in Gaza, despite not being an expert in this field.
While P&I is not a member of the Australian Press Council, it seems reasonable to assume it would wish to have standards comparable to the APC’s General Principles which member publications are committed to uphold. Central to these are ‘to take reasonable steps to comply’ with the Principles which relate in particular to ‘accuracy and clarity’ and ‘fairness and balance’.
P&I’s business model makes it difficult to meet the APC’s precise Principles under these two headings. The model involves publishing a series of op-eds without any separate presentation of factual material, which is almost certainly inconsistent with the provision under the APC’s first General Principle that factual material should be distinguishable from opinion. The blurring of facts and opinions has become commonplace across the media which is why the APC these days requires accuracy of ‘statements of fact’ wherever they appear, expecting reasonable steps to be taken by the publisher to ensure accuracy of such statements even in opinion pieces.
P&I’s business model also involves offering material attractive to a particular audience, with the risk of becoming an ‘echo chamber’ where ‘fairness and balance’ is difficult to achieve, or even define. But that does not mean the principle of fairness and balance should be disregarded. Some effort is needed to allow different voices to be heard even when the publisher has a particular viewpoint (which he is free to promote), or when there may be a widely held view amongst the readership (and contributors).
While as a non-expert I have no direct evidence of inaccurate statements of fact in the reporting on Middle East issues, the evidence of lack of fairness and balance is overwhelming.
An examination of P&I in the month of September reveals that there have been 75 articles relating to conflicts in the Middle East, or over 25% of P&I’s total of 265 articles. On only two days (15 and 18 September) were no articles on Middle East issues published. Of the 75, at least 70 were directly critical of Israel (a few were more concerned about attitudes in Australia towards refugees, and one by Mike Keating presented a possible peace proposal that seemed reasonably neutral in its portrayal of the different sides). None defended Israel’s actions. And references to the brutality of Hamas has been rare, let alone recognition of its misogynism, homophobia or its theocratic links to Iran.
A number of the articles critical of Israel have also appeared to me significantly unbalanced themselves. Civilian casualties of actions by the IDF may reasonably be highlighted as demonstrating a disproportionate response and lack of care by Israel, but to portray these as equivalent to those murdered intentionally by Hamas, even as hostages, ignores the laws of conflict. (I was particularly concerned by the graphic pictures of dead Palestinian children published by P&I in the same week that six innocent hostages were murdered by Hamas.)
No doubt Israel under Netanyahu has undermined chances of a two-nation solution to conflict in the Middle East. I have no sympathy for Netanyahu or his cabinet, and their failures over recent years have rightly been highlighted in P&I. But it seems also true, and not mentioned in P&I, that the Hamas brutal action on 7 October last year has proven to be brilliantly effective in undermining any opportunity for a long-term solution. It scuppered the slowly improving relations between the Gulf states and Israel. It provoked just the reaction it wanted from Netanyahu, and it has since successfully exploited the civilian casualties from IDF action even while its deployment of combatants demonstrates its own lack of care about such casualties amongst its own people. And it has strengthened the influence of Iran.
My concern is the relentless pursuit of one view on Israel and Palestine. Some effort for balance is needed if P&I’s generally good reputation for quality material from people with expertise is to be preserved.
Andrew Podger was a Public Member of the Australian Press Council from 2013 to 2022.
Editors’ note:
We have posted this article despite my profound disagreement.
I have a high regard for Andrew Podger.
Genocide, mass murder and ethnic cleansing does not warrant balance and fairness. I would not give “balance and fairness” to the holocaust. I will not give “balance and fairness” to the Israeli genocide.
The occupation, murder and ethnic cleansing in Palestine commenced over a century ago, not on October 7 last year. It is ongoing. We did the same in Australia to our indigenous people.
Hamas is the excuse for Israel’s unending violence. The real intention is to murder and force Palestinians out of Gaza. At this very moment that is happening in North Gaza. Then it will be all of Gaza, the West Bank and Jerusalem.
The media give us story after story about 100 Israeli hostages held by Hamas. There is almost no mention of over 10,000 Palestinians held in brutal Israeli detention. That includes Marwan Barghouti, often described as the “Palestinian Nelson Mandela”. He has been imprisoned for over 20 years and is regularly assaulted.
We do carry a lot of stories in Pearls and Irritations about Gaza/Palestine. That is because the cruelty and defiance of international law and world opinion by Israel worsens by the day. The complicity of the US and Australia and the media in both countries is disgraceful and ongoing. More and more our media, including the ABC has become a staging post for very powerful US/Israeli propaganda. The media is frightened by the Israeli lobby.
An occupying power, Israel, constructing an apartheid state does not have a legal right of self defence, despite what Anthony Albanese tells us.
The issues are not complicated. They are very clear. There is GENOCIDE.
History will be a harsh judge of the “civilised” West, “democracy” in Israel and the IDF “the most moral army in the world”. All that is now in tatters.
– John Menadue, Editor in Chief
Letters to the Editor:
How serious is Mr. Podger about the integrity of journalism?
Andrew Podger is honorary Professor of Public Policy at The Australian National University, and former Australian Public Service Commissioner and Secretary of the Departments of Health and Aged Care, Housing and Regional Development, and Administrative Services. He was national president of the Institute of Public Administration Australia from 2004 to 2010, and a member of the foundation board of the Australian and New Zealand School of Government. He was made an Officer of the Order of Australia (AO) in 2004, and has written extensively on social policy including health financing, retirement incomes and tax and social security, and on public administration.
Contributions to Pearls and Irritations
Your contribution will fund quality independent comment and analysis in Pearls and Irritations
Contribute
