Intifada Hits the Headlines: How the Israeli Press Misreported the Outbreak of the Second Palestinian Uprising (Indiana Series in Middle East Studies)

In this nuanced and detailed study of newspaper reports during the escalation of the second Intifada in the fall of 2000, Daniel Dor shows how reality is subject to distortion and manipulation by the media. In an analysis of the heart of Israel's media establishment - the newspapers Yediot Ahronot, Ma'ariv, and Ha'aretz - he finds a wide gap between the reality reported by field reporters and the eventual newspaper accounts framed by editors. Led by beliefs, opinions, and emotional responses rather than the facts provided by their reporters, these editors created a platform on which a new and fearful narrative for Israeli-Palestinian relations was built. As a result of these distortions, newspapers effectively suppressed certain elements of reality and systematically emphasized others to construct a new set of ''facts'' that have had fateful effects on Israel's responses to the Palestinians. By integrating a wide variety of critical approaches from linguistics and communication studies, Dor convincingly shows how the news is constructed. The distance between distortion and reality is often simply pages or even lines away. Dor demonstrates how the positioning, graphic saliency, front-page reference, headline selection and framing, and the visual semiotics of news stories change the facts reported in the articles themselves. Headlines and photos may tell one story and a news analysis may tell another, but, as headline consumers, readers may receive only the most visible one. Dor's careful day-by-day investigation of reporting on the Intifada reveals how quickly newspapers were able to produce and participate in a new consensual narrative that effectively ended the peace process. But while Dor does demonstrate that the media construct the news rather than simply report it, his sophisticated analysis also shows that no one entity or person is responsible. Rather than a supreme authority, it is the influence of fear, anger, ignorance, and a desire to please and sell newspapers, Dor argues, that threaten the freedom of the press in a liberal democracy.

In this nuanced and detailed study of newspaper reporting during the
escalation of the second Intifada in the fall of 2000, Daniel Dor shows how real
events are subject to distortion and manipulation by the media. In an analysis of
the heart of Israel's media establishment -- the newspapers Yediot Ahronot, Ma'ariv,
and Ha'aretz -- he finds a wide gap between the reality reported by field reporters
and the eventual newspaper accounts framed by editors. Led by beliefs, opinions, and
emotional responses rather than the facts provided by their reporters, these editors
created a platform on which a new and fearful narrative for Israeli--Palestinian
relations was built. Yet while Dor demonstrates that the media construct the news
rather than simply report it, his sophisticated analysis also shows that no one
entity or person is responsible. Rather than a supreme authority, Dor argues, it is
the influence of fear, anger, ignorance, and a desire to please and sell newspapers
that threatens the freedom of the press in a liberal democracy.

In this nuanced and detailed study of newspaper reporting during the escalation of the second Intifada in the fall of 2000, Daniel Dor shows how real events are subject to distortion and manipulation by the media. In an analysis of the heart of Israel's media establishment -- the newspapers Yediot Ahronot, Ma'ariv, and Ha'aretz -- he finds a wide gap between the reality reported by field reporters and the eventual newspaper accounts framed by editors. Led by beliefs, opinions, and emotional responses rather than the facts provided by their reporters, these editors created a platform on which a new and fearful narrative for Israeli-Palestinian relations was built. Yet while Dor demonstrates that the media construct the news rather than simply report it, his sophisticated analysis also shows that no one entity or person is responsible. Rather than a supreme authority, Dor argues, it is the influence of fear, anger, ignorance, and a desire to please and to sell newspapers that threatens the freedom of the press in a liberal democracy. Preface......Page 8 Acknowledgments......Page 10 1. Introduction......Page 14 2. “Under Arafat’s Baton”......Page 31 3. “Make No Mistake, Yasser”......Page 48 4. “The Limits of Restraint”......Page 67 5. “A Fifth Column”......Page 96 6. “In All Their Murderous Ugliness”......Page 118 7. “We Have Turned Every Stone”......Page 143 8. Conclusion......Page 168 Notes......Page 184 Bibliography......Page 188 Index......Page 192 Showing how media shape public opinion in times of crisis, the author finds a wide gap between the reality reported by field reporters and the eventual newspaper accounts framed by editors. By integrating a wide variety of critical approaches from linguistics and communication studies, he shows how the news is constructed. The first newspaper reports of the "El-Aqsa Intifada" reached the newsstands on Monday, October 2, after a weekend extended by the Jewish New Year (Rosh Hashana).