Haaretz Makes an Editorial Decision
It was Haaretz who spread the story of the Jerusalem Post firing Naomi Hazan. The part of the story that fit their agenda, that is: that she was fired, with the (unstated) implication that this was retaliation for... for what exactly? That she's a Lefty? It was an odd story.
Then the JP explained, and suddenly the story was turned on its head.
This morning I looked through the entire paper edition of Haaretz, from front to back. There is no mention of the story, no explanation that the previous version was fundamentally flawed, nothing.
Are we to surmise that if it doesn't fit the political agenda, it isn't newsworthy? At the newspaper that prides itself on being serious, thoughtful, and intelligent? It's that blatant?
Then the JP explained, and suddenly the story was turned on its head.
This morning I looked through the entire paper edition of Haaretz, from front to back. There is no mention of the story, no explanation that the previous version was fundamentally flawed, nothing.
Are we to surmise that if it doesn't fit the political agenda, it isn't newsworthy? At the newspaper that prides itself on being serious, thoughtful, and intelligent? It's that blatant?
Originally posted by Yaacov Lozowick's Ruminations
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment