Karen Molina
Orientalism and Occidentalism
Dr. Metcalf
Spring 2009
The “clash of civilization” between East and West mentioned by many authors, including Edward Said, seems to be a growing barrier amongst the people of these areas. This barrier has not only been around in the present time but developed over many years after the interaction of different people. The labeling and stereotypes developed by people for one another may be suggested as the reason for this “clash”. Also, the feeling of not getting along with “different” people and feeling that one’s way is the right way have not helped bring people to understand one another. These feelings also paved way to a position of supremacy over another and this is shown through out history. Through various forms this clash resonates and seems almost irreversible.
European supremacy is discussed in Edward Said’s book titled Orientalism as dating back to ancient Greece and the time of Xerxes of Persia. Said includes a passage from Aeschylus’s play The Persians, which is the earliest Athenian extant. In this play a chorus section by the Persian army after they were defeated by the Greeks brings out a notion of European supremacy and Asian inferiority. Through the words expressed Asia speaks through and by virtue of the European imagination, which is depicted as victorious over Asia, that hostile “other” world beyond the seas (Said, pg. 56). Plays in the ancient world served as the media services we have today. People who did not travel and did not experience contact with the “other” relied on things such as this to get an idea of what the others are like. In this play, for example, the defeated Asians were portrayed as weak, empty and without hope. It seems to be a region’s mission to make itself seem the higher status group. In classical Greece and Rome geographers, historians, public figures like Caesar, orator, and poets added to the fund of taxonomic lore separating races, regions, nations, and minds from each other; much of that was self-serving and existed to prove that Romans and Greeks were superior to other kinds of people (Said, pg.57).
Feelings of superiority, although Said greatly focused on Greece and Rome, were displayed in other areas of the world. This can be seen on the African continent where a vast civilization enslaved a whole group of people. It is known that in Ancient Egypt there was also a feeling of superiority over others and in this case it was the Jews. Those who were enslaved helped build the magnificent civilization but where shunned away from being equally treated in society. Every early civilization may it be on the African continent, in Mesoamerica (which held the Aztecs and Mayans), or South America (which held the Incans) displayed and took actions that could be proof of the feeling of power compared to others.
An example of the phrase “clash of civilizations” during the 20th century occurred after the development of Israel after the Second World War. This brought great problems as the Palestinians that lived in those land were forced to share it with the newcomers. Tensions have occurred through out the years and continue to this present day as the recently established Israel began to take more than its assigned share. Israel has managed, with the aid of other nations, to develop an organized army which it uses to acquire the segments of the Palestinian territories. Many Palestinians are forced to leave their homes, live in refugee camps in other countries, and many casualties have disrupted families. In the film, The color of olives we can see the restricted life that a Palestinian family lives under. They were able to keep their home but it is under Israeli military land which affects whether or not they can leave anywhere else. The film shows the family’s struggle to keep their lands running smoothly even though the short trip to them from their home has become a longer more restricted journey through Israeli checkpoints.
Another film that shows the terrible life that Palestinians must live under is titled Private. In this film a Palestinian family is shown through its daily struggles when Israeli soldiers take their second floor for military purposes. The whole family is forced to live downstairs and is restricted in through out their home. The most moving scene of this film takes place when the family is forced into a room by the Israeli soldiers and they start firing their arms outside. The father of the family realizes that their younger daughter is not among them. He quickly calls her to come close to the door and calms her down through the opposite side. The little girl spends all night away from her family blocked by the locked door, which is opened once again in the morning. This shows how the soldiers have no pity over the lives of anyone, not even children, that they see as the “other”. Both the Palestinians and Israelis have fought for many decades and until there is a solution it will continue to destroy lives. Both are angry at each other, both see the other as wrong, and both want the other out. This constant battle over land has created what Said calls clash of civilizations between people that live closely together in a single nation.
A more current clash of civilizations occurred after the events of September 11 which developed a barrier between the people of the United States and the Middle East. After the terrorist attacks, the United States told its people that men of Middle Eastern origin had been responsible for such gruesome acts against innocent people. After that day feelings towards all people of the Middle East changed. People became skeptical and to a point perhaps paranoid in the presence of the “other”. The government has a close watch over what people of those countries of origin are doing and make sure that any mysterious actions are investigated. As a form of national security people saw this as best but it took it to greater levels that could be linked to discrimination. After 9/11 people of Middle Eastern descent were discriminated against and stereotyped in all forms. Some people that encountered them keep a watchful eye and report any suspicious actions. Some are falsely accused and sentenced without having any evidence.
A good film that represents this clash between people in the United States is titled American East. This film follows an Egyptian family through the daily struggled while living in L.A. The protagonist named Mustafa looses his son in an airport and begins calling his name, which is Mohammed. This creates chaos and makes him a suspect by the FBI. He is brought it for an interrogation after many Muslim items were found in his car. Once they ask him why he has each thing he is allowed to leave. Days later the FBI takes him in again after doing a background check on everything Mustafa does. It was found that he sends a high amount of money to Egypt which he is forced to explain or it will be taken as helping fund the terrorists. Once he clarifies that it is to buy the land of his father back, he is released and his frozen funds can once again be accessed. This shows the incredible paranoia that exists in the United States and also shows how the United States invades a person’s privacy in order find out everything they do. By doing this, the basis of this country which protects the rights of people has become one that no one follows anymore.
The basis of this clash of civilizations involves not understanding those viewed as the other. For example, the United States through the news and popular media depict the people of the Middle East. This alters the view of the people and further creates a barrier among people. TV culture in the United States has placed people of Middle Eastern descent as the barbaric terrorists who are just looking for a chance to kill innocent people. Things are taken farther in proportion and have developed stereotypes that have make people skeptical and feel “unsafe” around the other. The clash of civilizations discussed are conflicts that may be resolved if an understanding of the other can take place. This can be hard, especially when dealing with the Arab-Israeli conflict, due to the irreversible actions already taken. Both groups have developed a vision of the other as the enemy and this feeling is passed down to future generations. It is a hard issue to resolve since both want the same thing and will not back down from getting it. This issue is a clash of civilizations within a single nation among people who view themselves as so different that it is hard to coexist. Edward Said is correct when he says that there is a barrier between East and West. The clash, with evidence of the news and other popular media, does resonate. But it is also seen that clashes can be within a single area or miles apart. This is especially seen between the U.S. and the Middle East. The United States has its own vision of the East and the people of the East also have a view of the U.S. as a dominating tyrant nation. Stereotypes are everywhere and amongst all people but the clash of civilization took it to the next level. Stereotypes have become one that could affect a person’s life significantly and cause great divisions among people.
Thursday, May 7, 2009
Week 14- Private
The film titled Private, in my oppinion, was one of the most conmovating films we have seen in this class. The setting is in a quiet section of Palestine where a family lives out its normal life. The family is formed by two parents and their five children of varying ages. One night Isreali soldiers come into their home and lock the family into a single room. An Israeli soldier tells the father that their house has been confiscated by the Israeli army to be used as an observation post. The soldiers place rules that the family must obbey or risk death. The house is divided the second floor is off limits to the family as it belongs to the soldiers and the first floor is the only place the family can reside in. All of the belongging from the bedrooms are off limits and the family only has a few clothing the father was allowed to obtain for each family member. The children continue to go through their lives including going to school and the father (Mohammed) continues to work. The one who is mostly exposed to the dangers of the soldiers is the mother (Samia) who is a housewife hence remains alone at home. When her friend does arrive she is interrogated by an Israeli soldier and told to leave and never come back to the house. When Samia tries to explain for her friend she is abruptly told to be quiet.
The most moving scene, for me personally, was the scene where the family was locked into a room due to a cross-fire by the soldiers. Mohammed realized that his youngers dughter is not with them but at the other side of the door. He stays next to the door conforting her until the doors open again in the morning. The child is traumatized by this event but when given a choice to stay home with her mother, she refuses and goes to school. This shows how she will do anything but stay home. Through the film the family becomes divided as Mohammed wants to stay in "his home" rather than leave while Samia fears for the life of her children and thinks its better is they leave. This film further displays the cruelty and manipulation of the Israeli soldiers on innocent Palestian families. After watching this, is it surprising that there is a clash of civilizations??
The most moving scene, for me personally, was the scene where the family was locked into a room due to a cross-fire by the soldiers. Mohammed realized that his youngers dughter is not with them but at the other side of the door. He stays next to the door conforting her until the doors open again in the morning. The child is traumatized by this event but when given a choice to stay home with her mother, she refuses and goes to school. This shows how she will do anything but stay home. Through the film the family becomes divided as Mohammed wants to stay in "his home" rather than leave while Samia fears for the life of her children and thinks its better is they leave. This film further displays the cruelty and manipulation of the Israeli soldiers on innocent Palestian families. After watching this, is it surprising that there is a clash of civilizations??
Week 13- The Color of Olives
The Color of Olives shows the life of the Amer family who once lived in the Masha village in Palestine, which is the last village at end of phase A. The lands around the family's home was obtained by Israel and made part of their expanding collection of Palestinian land. The family for generations has cultivated many products and spent all of their effort on the lands they owned. Today, after Israels' entry, life is different. The family is restricted to go anywhere they want. If they want to do something outside the home, like working on their lands, they must wait on the soldiers to open gates. When they are able to travel out of their homes, a short journey to the lands prior to the invasion, now takes more time due to the various checkpoints set up by soldiers. At the checkpoints they have to show identification, explain where they are going, and answer any other questions since failure to do so may not allow them to pass.
The film provided pictures of the lands before the entry of soldiers and it displayed a sort of paradise full of vegetation. Now the lands do produce still but the lands are not as they were before. Also, structures such as the chicken coop were destroyed and the remains are still at the site. This film provided a insight of how oppressed living in such conditions can be for a family but it also shows how despite adversity the family still stands firm.
The film provided pictures of the lands before the entry of soldiers and it displayed a sort of paradise full of vegetation. Now the lands do produce still but the lands are not as they were before. Also, structures such as the chicken coop were destroyed and the remains are still at the site. This film provided a insight of how oppressed living in such conditions can be for a family but it also shows how despite adversity the family still stands firm.
Week 12- Orientalism and Occidentalism Now
The film Al-irhab wal kabab or "terrorism and bbq" provides a inside view of how people Egypt view terrorism. This film is a comedy which is great at exaggerating stereotypes that people have amongst themselves. The protagonist is named Ahmed and is postrayed as a hard working man who is trying to keep his family in the middle class. It was funny to watch stereotypes such as the typical unpleasable loud wife who happens to be under a "dozen" comforters being included in this film. The great struggle in govenrment buildings is also included in this film when
Ahmed is forced to take a day off in order to arrange with school officials for his children attend a school nearer his home. Once in the building it is so crowded that he misses the office he needs a couple of times until he reaches it. Once he does, the person in charge is not in. Instead a man praying at all hours of day is there along with a very loud secretary. Since he is not able to get it done he takes off another day from work. When he is not able to get help again he starts a simple argument that places him as a terrorist without him realizing it. Eventually he walks out along with the captives due to the relationship he had developed with them. I found it very interesting how the women are portrayed in this film. The western world view of women as inferior and oppressed is clearly challenged in this film. Starting with Ahmed's wife who is a strong standing character the view of women is shown differently. Women put fear in men and are very effective in getting their way as it was seen in the woman who's boy went in the building. This film was very funny and a kind of film that gives us an idea of how the "other" sees themselves.
Ahmed is forced to take a day off in order to arrange with school officials for his children attend a school nearer his home. Once in the building it is so crowded that he misses the office he needs a couple of times until he reaches it. Once he does, the person in charge is not in. Instead a man praying at all hours of day is there along with a very loud secretary. Since he is not able to get it done he takes off another day from work. When he is not able to get help again he starts a simple argument that places him as a terrorist without him realizing it. Eventually he walks out along with the captives due to the relationship he had developed with them. I found it very interesting how the women are portrayed in this film. The western world view of women as inferior and oppressed is clearly challenged in this film. Starting with Ahmed's wife who is a strong standing character the view of women is shown differently. Women put fear in men and are very effective in getting their way as it was seen in the woman who's boy went in the building. This film was very funny and a kind of film that gives us an idea of how the "other" sees themselves.
Week 10- Terrorism, Fundamentalism and Crusaders and Conspiracy Theories
The film we watched today was about a man that interviewed different people asking them the same question: what is terrorism?
This film gave us an idea of how differently people define terrorism but also how it is linked with stereotypes. The filmaker travels to the Middle East, to Europe and the United States noting what the common person, intellectuals, and government position holders have to say on the matter. In the film there is a long clip of definitions on terrorism by government officials. Each one has a different definition, some linking it to fear placed on people and others take it to the extent of innocent people being killed. It was specially interesting to see the definitions of nations that we do not focus on in this class. The speaker from Spain goes on about how it places fear in people and how that is the intension. It was also interesting listening to the different definitions by Israel and Palestine since they continously are involved in what each calls "acts of terrorism".
Personally I found it interesting what the common person had to say about terrorism. In some places it was clear that the people, when defining terrorism, insinuated people of the Middle East. One woman stated that she is fearful and does not understand why "they" would do such thing. In the minds of most people, especially in the U.S. due to September 11, the word "they" is linked directly to a group of people. What gets me upset is that most people do not know much of the history nor current events of situations. I think most base it on a news article title or quick news coverage that they encounter and after which they assume they know enough to make a judgement.
This film gave us an idea of how differently people define terrorism but also how it is linked with stereotypes. The filmaker travels to the Middle East, to Europe and the United States noting what the common person, intellectuals, and government position holders have to say on the matter. In the film there is a long clip of definitions on terrorism by government officials. Each one has a different definition, some linking it to fear placed on people and others take it to the extent of innocent people being killed. It was specially interesting to see the definitions of nations that we do not focus on in this class. The speaker from Spain goes on about how it places fear in people and how that is the intension. It was also interesting listening to the different definitions by Israel and Palestine since they continously are involved in what each calls "acts of terrorism".
Personally I found it interesting what the common person had to say about terrorism. In some places it was clear that the people, when defining terrorism, insinuated people of the Middle East. One woman stated that she is fearful and does not understand why "they" would do such thing. In the minds of most people, especially in the U.S. due to September 11, the word "they" is linked directly to a group of people. What gets me upset is that most people do not know much of the history nor current events of situations. I think most base it on a news article title or quick news coverage that they encounter and after which they assume they know enough to make a judgement.
Week 9- Occidentalism
We further explored the conspiracy theories in the United States and the manipulation of the people by those in higher positions of government. The film Hijacking Catastrophy helped provide the glimpse of the other side of current events. The film begins with a quote.
"All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the peacemakers for lack of patriotism and exposing the counntry to danger- it works the same in any country."~ Nazi Reich Marshall Hermann Goering at War Trials.
This is a good introduction to the motif of this film but it is fighting to see a comparison of the U.S. today with the German Nazi regime. Germany under the Nazi regime was the perfect example of manipulation by the government, or in this case a single leader. People supported the idea of superiority of the race and helped in the actions taken against the Jews. No one said anything as most supported what was happening or were scared of the consequences for defying the government. Many innocent lives were killed during the reign of this regime which was kept alive by the people convinced it was the right way of things.
The United States, in this film, is portrayed as a manipulating nation especially after the events of September 11. With the support of the people the U.S. took the opportunity to pass laws that would have never been supported previously. The feeling of loss of the people was taken advantage of to allow U.S. forceful interactions with other nations. the media also had a big role in maintaining the people cnvinced that what is being done is backed up by evidence. Using this tactic the war on Iraq was declared, Saddam Hussein was captured and executed, and the U.S. was able to brin gits influence into other nations. This film proves evidence through out and makes the audience question if this is the real intention of the nation we hold highly of for its "land of the free".
"All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the peacemakers for lack of patriotism and exposing the counntry to danger- it works the same in any country."~ Nazi Reich Marshall Hermann Goering at War Trials.
This is a good introduction to the motif of this film but it is fighting to see a comparison of the U.S. today with the German Nazi regime. Germany under the Nazi regime was the perfect example of manipulation by the government, or in this case a single leader. People supported the idea of superiority of the race and helped in the actions taken against the Jews. No one said anything as most supported what was happening or were scared of the consequences for defying the government. Many innocent lives were killed during the reign of this regime which was kept alive by the people convinced it was the right way of things.
The United States, in this film, is portrayed as a manipulating nation especially after the events of September 11. With the support of the people the U.S. took the opportunity to pass laws that would have never been supported previously. The feeling of loss of the people was taken advantage of to allow U.S. forceful interactions with other nations. the media also had a big role in maintaining the people cnvinced that what is being done is backed up by evidence. Using this tactic the war on Iraq was declared, Saddam Hussein was captured and executed, and the U.S. was able to brin gits influence into other nations. This film proves evidence through out and makes the audience question if this is the real intention of the nation we hold highly of for its "land of the free".
Thursday, April 9, 2009
Paper 3- Comparing news reports
Karen Molina
Dr. Metcalf
Orientalism and Occidentalism
Spring 2009
Due: April 9, 2009
Comparing News Reports
News broadcast along with other forms of media have facilitated the connection or communication between the nations of the world. Although the focus is the nation’s issues, international concerns and incident discussions are also available to everyone. There are numerous news groups and journalists that provide their version of an incident, which sometimes lead to a confusion of what is really true. The ways in which the news is written also depends on the views of the news corporation and the people who run it. In the present time the Israeli- Palestinian conflict has been a major focus in the world and has been a perfect example of the difference in news reports.
In November 2008 a blockade of the Palestinian Gaza strip by Israeli forces terrified the world, as trapped civilians suffered cruel conditions. News coverage through newspapers and television gave the people of the United States, among other countries, coverage of casualties as well as the progress of cease-fire. One of the most controversial events during the Israeli invasion was the attack on United Nations schools located in the Palestinian Gaza territory. These schools served as refugee shelters for a number of desperate Palestinians looking for refuge from the constant attacks on civilians. This event shocked the world and was a center of interest due to it being a U.N. school. Although it was one event, the news articles on the same incident were quite differently presented.
An article of the Arab News on the incident taking place Tuesday January 7, 2009, was presented quite differently than that of the New York Times. The first difference can be noted in the title of the articles. In the Arab Times the title of the article is “Massacre at refugee shelter” and was written by Hisham Abu Taha. The article, discussing the same incident, in the New York Times is titled “Israeli Shells Kill 40 at Gaza U.N. School” and was written by Taghreed El-Khodary and Isabel Kershner. At first glance the titles of the articles give a different perspective on the incident. The word “massacre” is used to describe the incident through a Middle Eastern perspective and is a strong word to emphasize the casualties that occurred. Other important words used were “refugee shelter” which was the exact purpose of the U.N. school. The New York Times, compared to the Middle East, uses less descriptive language to headline the incident. The title does not mention it was a massacre of a refugee shelter but rather describes the incident with a basic overview of whom and what was involved. The “who” is Israel, the “what” is a U.N. school, and instead of a massacre it is mentioned that 40 people were killed.
In further reading the article by the Arab Times it is clear that it provides an Arab interpretation of the incident, while the New York Times mainly focuses on Israel’s actions. Taha mentions that 43 people were killed and dozens were wounded in the incident compared to the 40 stated by El-Khodary. This shows the inaccuracy of the information but leaves someone wondering and questioning the right number of casualties. The New York Times fails to name the school in which such casualties occurred, while the Arab News gives the name Al-Fakhora School. The name of the school, although foreign to those not from the area, is important information that gives the institution its identity. In this article, it seems as the focus is on the actions of Israel rather than the school and the civilians within. In the opening paragraph, the New York Times mentions that the motif of the attack was that Israel believes that Hamas fighters had fired from the school. Arab News does not mention such thing but does say that the “United Nations regularly gave the Israeli army exact geographical coordinates of its facilities” to keep them safe as they served as refugees, which is missing in the other article. Such information further leaves a person uncertain of the real situation and cause of the attack.
A favorable attitude towards Israel is present in the New York Times article and remains as such through out the news. Perhaps it is due to the alliance between Israel and the United States as well as the post 9/11 view of the Arab nations. An example of such preference in the article is the mention of the Prime Minister of Israel and his planned visit to Egypt to discuss cease fire. This is clearly off the topic but is described after the opening paragraph. At this section of the article more about the incident should have been mentioned rather than what was included. An inappropriate statement by El-Khodary was about a rocket that was launched by Hamas and is said to have wounded an infant. This information has no reason to be mentioned as Palestinian casualties specifically those of numerous innocent children, were not included. An infant wounded is awful but if that is to be mentioned, for what reason is the death by gun shot of many innocent children not mentioned as well. The article also includes the Israeli view of Hamas as callous towards the lives of the Palestinian civilians. This should not be a subjective news article about Hamas but should have the role of informing of the incident. After a long introduction to an Israeli point of view, the article by El-Khodary ends with a short casualty report, actions taken by the Palestinian president, another school incident, and a few words of rage by a U.N. relief member. Despite their mention, the information was shorter and less descriptive than the beginning of the article.
The Arab News provides a closer look into the incident and continues to look at other forms of aid to the Palestinian people. The allegations that the coordinates were given to Israel, if true, clearly shows Israel as the worst, deceiving, and heartless enemy. This article clearly argues that the location of the refugees was known and targeting it showed no mercy for the refugees. It is also revealed that when reporters asked the Israeli Foreign Minister about the deaths, she was “not familiar” with such occurrence. In the article ambulance and medic targeting is also discussed as they not being able to help injured people since they are shot by assault helicopters. Like the article by the New York Times this information goes of the main topic of the incident but links it since it deals with the impediment of humanitarian aid.
A final and important aspect of both news articles is the photograph included at the top of each article. The New York Times included a picture of a young wounded Palestinian being carried by others. This photograph demonstrates the chaos and anger seen in the faces of the people present the day of the incident. The Arab News presents a more graphic and heartbreaking image of the casualties, but it is not one taken of the incident discussed. Instead a picture of a man trying to pull out the body of a child out of the rubble is shown. The use of a child in such condition could be used to capture the cruel reality of the blockage but can be seen as being too dramatic with the purpose of obtaining increased pity from the people. The use of imaging is important and different depending on the message being transmitted by the article.
The bombing of the Al-Fakhora School in Jabaliya on the 11th day of the war on Gaza demonstrated the extent of Israel’s invasion. Refugees sought shelter but they soon realized that there is not safe place. The news of the incident spread through out the world, but different views developed due to the way it was presented to the public. As a person reading the article by the New York Times, more knowledge is received about the actions being taken by Israel. On the other hand, a person reading the article by the Arab News is informed of the lack of respect by Israel towards humanitarian groups in Gaza during the blockage. Both articles mention the school bombing, but the information included varies depending on the newspaper. This creates a problem as people are oriented and manipulated by what they read, which may not be the entire truth.
Dr. Metcalf
Orientalism and Occidentalism
Spring 2009
Due: April 9, 2009
Comparing News Reports
News broadcast along with other forms of media have facilitated the connection or communication between the nations of the world. Although the focus is the nation’s issues, international concerns and incident discussions are also available to everyone. There are numerous news groups and journalists that provide their version of an incident, which sometimes lead to a confusion of what is really true. The ways in which the news is written also depends on the views of the news corporation and the people who run it. In the present time the Israeli- Palestinian conflict has been a major focus in the world and has been a perfect example of the difference in news reports.
In November 2008 a blockade of the Palestinian Gaza strip by Israeli forces terrified the world, as trapped civilians suffered cruel conditions. News coverage through newspapers and television gave the people of the United States, among other countries, coverage of casualties as well as the progress of cease-fire. One of the most controversial events during the Israeli invasion was the attack on United Nations schools located in the Palestinian Gaza territory. These schools served as refugee shelters for a number of desperate Palestinians looking for refuge from the constant attacks on civilians. This event shocked the world and was a center of interest due to it being a U.N. school. Although it was one event, the news articles on the same incident were quite differently presented.
An article of the Arab News on the incident taking place Tuesday January 7, 2009, was presented quite differently than that of the New York Times. The first difference can be noted in the title of the articles. In the Arab Times the title of the article is “Massacre at refugee shelter” and was written by Hisham Abu Taha. The article, discussing the same incident, in the New York Times is titled “Israeli Shells Kill 40 at Gaza U.N. School” and was written by Taghreed El-Khodary and Isabel Kershner. At first glance the titles of the articles give a different perspective on the incident. The word “massacre” is used to describe the incident through a Middle Eastern perspective and is a strong word to emphasize the casualties that occurred. Other important words used were “refugee shelter” which was the exact purpose of the U.N. school. The New York Times, compared to the Middle East, uses less descriptive language to headline the incident. The title does not mention it was a massacre of a refugee shelter but rather describes the incident with a basic overview of whom and what was involved. The “who” is Israel, the “what” is a U.N. school, and instead of a massacre it is mentioned that 40 people were killed.
In further reading the article by the Arab Times it is clear that it provides an Arab interpretation of the incident, while the New York Times mainly focuses on Israel’s actions. Taha mentions that 43 people were killed and dozens were wounded in the incident compared to the 40 stated by El-Khodary. This shows the inaccuracy of the information but leaves someone wondering and questioning the right number of casualties. The New York Times fails to name the school in which such casualties occurred, while the Arab News gives the name Al-Fakhora School. The name of the school, although foreign to those not from the area, is important information that gives the institution its identity. In this article, it seems as the focus is on the actions of Israel rather than the school and the civilians within. In the opening paragraph, the New York Times mentions that the motif of the attack was that Israel believes that Hamas fighters had fired from the school. Arab News does not mention such thing but does say that the “United Nations regularly gave the Israeli army exact geographical coordinates of its facilities” to keep them safe as they served as refugees, which is missing in the other article. Such information further leaves a person uncertain of the real situation and cause of the attack.
A favorable attitude towards Israel is present in the New York Times article and remains as such through out the news. Perhaps it is due to the alliance between Israel and the United States as well as the post 9/11 view of the Arab nations. An example of such preference in the article is the mention of the Prime Minister of Israel and his planned visit to Egypt to discuss cease fire. This is clearly off the topic but is described after the opening paragraph. At this section of the article more about the incident should have been mentioned rather than what was included. An inappropriate statement by El-Khodary was about a rocket that was launched by Hamas and is said to have wounded an infant. This information has no reason to be mentioned as Palestinian casualties specifically those of numerous innocent children, were not included. An infant wounded is awful but if that is to be mentioned, for what reason is the death by gun shot of many innocent children not mentioned as well. The article also includes the Israeli view of Hamas as callous towards the lives of the Palestinian civilians. This should not be a subjective news article about Hamas but should have the role of informing of the incident. After a long introduction to an Israeli point of view, the article by El-Khodary ends with a short casualty report, actions taken by the Palestinian president, another school incident, and a few words of rage by a U.N. relief member. Despite their mention, the information was shorter and less descriptive than the beginning of the article.
The Arab News provides a closer look into the incident and continues to look at other forms of aid to the Palestinian people. The allegations that the coordinates were given to Israel, if true, clearly shows Israel as the worst, deceiving, and heartless enemy. This article clearly argues that the location of the refugees was known and targeting it showed no mercy for the refugees. It is also revealed that when reporters asked the Israeli Foreign Minister about the deaths, she was “not familiar” with such occurrence. In the article ambulance and medic targeting is also discussed as they not being able to help injured people since they are shot by assault helicopters. Like the article by the New York Times this information goes of the main topic of the incident but links it since it deals with the impediment of humanitarian aid.
A final and important aspect of both news articles is the photograph included at the top of each article. The New York Times included a picture of a young wounded Palestinian being carried by others. This photograph demonstrates the chaos and anger seen in the faces of the people present the day of the incident. The Arab News presents a more graphic and heartbreaking image of the casualties, but it is not one taken of the incident discussed. Instead a picture of a man trying to pull out the body of a child out of the rubble is shown. The use of a child in such condition could be used to capture the cruel reality of the blockage but can be seen as being too dramatic with the purpose of obtaining increased pity from the people. The use of imaging is important and different depending on the message being transmitted by the article.
The bombing of the Al-Fakhora School in Jabaliya on the 11th day of the war on Gaza demonstrated the extent of Israel’s invasion. Refugees sought shelter but they soon realized that there is not safe place. The news of the incident spread through out the world, but different views developed due to the way it was presented to the public. As a person reading the article by the New York Times, more knowledge is received about the actions being taken by Israel. On the other hand, a person reading the article by the Arab News is informed of the lack of respect by Israel towards humanitarian groups in Gaza during the blockage. Both articles mention the school bombing, but the information included varies depending on the newspaper. This creates a problem as people are oriented and manipulated by what they read, which may not be the entire truth.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
