Toby's+Page

= The Israeli - Palestinian Conflict: Any End in Sight? = Imagine living in constant angst, terror, and apprehension. It seems that that is the regular day of an Israeli citizen in Jerusalem, or of a Palestinian in Gaza. For as long as Israel has been a recognized nation, it has had problems with its Muslim neighbors. The reason that there can be no real solution found? Religion. The argument from both sides is based off of their own history and religious beliefs, and no diplomat will be able to make up an answer for that argument that will see both sides content. What can be done to halt the violence and make the followers of each respective group feel safe?

EXAMPLE 1 Mainstream News Coverage

Article from May 3rd, 2010

Mahmoud Abbas, (Palestinian Authority President) says that he is finally ready for another round of indirect talks with [|Israel]. (CNN)

Ready, yet still apprehensive and weary of the possible turn to bad blood that the talks could take.

"He expects to meet Friday with George Mitchell, the U.S. special envoy to the Middle East. Abbas -- who said the United States is the only broker of talks -- said he will inform Mitchell of any Palestinian decision regarding talks. If talks are approved, they will be held in the time and manner proposed by the envoy, Abbas said. Water, borders, the settlements, the refugees, Jerusalem, security and Palestinian prisoners are issues that must be on the agenda, he said."


 * Article has a lot of quotations
 * It seems that Abbas contributed more to the article than the reporter did
 * Lacks a serious point of view
 * Descriptive, yet concise
 * Easy to read

EXAMPLE 1 Citizen Media

Article from May 17th, 2010

Found at the Huffington Post, however it was originally from Freedom Forward

Senator Barbara Boxer seems to see the conflict, and lack of direct peace talks between Israel and Palestine as the Palestinians fault, and would like to side with Israel, while Senator Dianne Feinstein looks like she has a more individualistic view, with her one goal as peace in the middle east. See article [|here]

"While "unconditional peace negotiations" might sound like a good thing, the details are something else entirely. Palestinian leaders have been opposed to entering into formal negotiations with Israel so long as Israel continues to build settlements on what is left of Palestinian land. Under those circumstances, negotiations essentially become a farce through which Israel buys extra time to keep expanding its territory. Supporting "unconditional" negotiations actually means holding talks without the precondition that Israel stop gobbling up Palestinian land."

" In that letter, Senator Boxer joined with 75 other senators to criticize Palestinian leaders for "refusing to enter into direct negotiations with Israel." The letter called for "unconditional peace negotiations."

"Fortunately, the Obama Administration is also ignoring Senator Boxer's letter. In pressuring the Israeli government to stop building East Jerusalem settlements, the White House has made it possible for Palestinians to agree to indirect talks with Israel. Israel has a great deal further to go, but it is a first step in the right direction."


 * This article is much more opinionated
 * The journalist writes much more
 * Fewer quotations
 * Wanders more, as the journalist relates the debate between the two Senators to other things happening on Capitol Hill

EXAMPLE 2 Mainstream News Coverage

Article from May 3rd, 2010

This article from the New York Times gives an outlook on the indirect peace talks from a combined Israeli, Palestinian, and American point of [|view]

"The so-called proximity talks, to be brokered by the American envoy, [|George J. Mitchell], were delayed in March after the Israeli government announced [|plans for new Jewish housing] in contested East Jerusalem. The top leaders on both sides have been taking care to avoid statements that could be deemed provocative; nevertheless, a certain dissonance remains evident."

"Dan Meridor, the Israeli minister for intelligence affairs, said Monday that “the real talks will be direct.” The idea of proximity talks was “quite strange,” he told Army Radio, after successive Israeli governments had held direct talks with the Palestinians on and off for the past 16 years."


 * Yet again, this article's text is based off of people's quotations
 * Concise, does not focus on the beauty of language but getting information out quickly
 * Article is an overview of different view points
 * Stays close to the subject of the title, and does not connect it with other events

EXAMPLE 2 Citizen Media

Article from May 7th, 2010

This [|article], also from the Huffington Post, is about Israel's position on the peace talks.

"George Mitchell, who is President Barack Obama's special representative for Mideast peace, is in the region for the start of four months of indirect talks between the Israelis and Palestinians that aim to bridge vast differences between the sides on the contours of a future Palestinian state."

"Israeli President Shimon Peres, who fills a largely ceremonial role, said the Jewish state is ready to negotiate. "Israel seeks a historic peace agreement with the Palestinians that will result in the founding of an independent Palestinian state alongside Israel," Peres said after meeting with Mitchell."

"Peres said resolving security concerns, such as rocket fire from the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip, are of the utmost importance to Israel. Rocket attacks from Gaza have almost [in]ceased since Israel's military offensive in the territory more than a year ago."


 * This article proves more like a mainstream piece than any other
 * Uses many quotations, author of the article does not write the bulk of the piece
 * Notice that Peres is a mostly

ANALYSIS

While there seems to be some parity in the way that mainstream news and citizen news report the Israel-Palestine situation, there are some aspects of each respective piece that differentiate greatly from their counter example. In the mainstream news articles, it seems that a greater portion of the article is devoted to the subject's words. Like in the first CNN article, the reporter is almost a scribe for PLO President Abbas, as almost the entire article comes straight from Abbas' mouth. Also, the language is more precise and understandable, as is the writing style. There are no long metaphors or beautiful pictures painted, it is simply cold hard fact. In the first example's citizen media piece, the article is more of an opinionated piece, with much more of the article coming from the reporter, and not consisting of simply quoting the two senators which are the subject of the piece. Could this be because of the silly citizen media's lack of funding? They definitely do not have the resources of a large, mainstream media news station, and therefore perhaps have to rely less on quotations and more on analytical analysis to make a good piece. This does perhaps give an advantage to the mainstream media groups, however, this could also prove as a misleading factor. Because of the larger amounts of money in businesses like CNN, The New York Times, CBS, and the Washington Post, could they be directed and altered simply by money, and not reporting the most important events? Also, the CNN piece seems to be focused more on the subject of the title, while the citizen media piece seems to start on the debate between two senators and then it leads into more issues from Capitol Hill. And finally, the Huffington Post article is more opinionated. The reason for this goes back once again to money. Large media news companies need to remain largely unbiased, because they need to maintain their viewers and readers, because what they are in the end are large companies. With the new goal mostly being to produce the most revenue, large conglomerates are having to make sure they stay true to what their viewers expect. This need to be successful drives them away from opinions, which makes them more different from citizen media with every year. Citizen media is based off of opinions, and in some cases, people wanting to read the most ridiculous opinion out there. While people watch mainstream news for information, it seems more and more that people look to citizen blogs for ridiculous opinions on what they hear about in the news just so much as they look at them for the news itself.

In the second example, the mainstream piece is taken from the New York Times, and the citizen piece, yet again from the Huffington Post. This Huffington Post article seems to have more quotations, as does the New York Times article. These two have much more common in between them than the first two. Both articles are rather concise, and are focused solely on the subject presented in the beginning.