|
Background
Research Methodology
Background
Many studies point to the crucial importance of the media, especially of news coverage in the printed media and television, as the primary sources through which the public obtains political information, particularly in times of violent conflict. In times of persistent, lengthy violent conflict, in which the parties have no direct contact with each other, the media is the main, almost exclusive, information pipeline, through which members of opposing parties receive information on one another. This is the case in Israeli- Palestinian relations: the media is the main information pipeline, mediating positions, moods, and ways of life between the parties. The media's decisive impact on opinion-shaping within Israeli society vis-à-vis the conflict and the Palestinians themselves, is linked to several factors:
A. Democratic media manipulation: Overall, the Israeli public consumes news solely from Israeli sources, and in large quantities. Information on the conflict as conveyed by the Israeli media is perceived by many Israelis to be highly relevant, and consequently, of utmost importance to their lives. The Israeli news consumer believes that he lives in a democratic state, where the supply of information is unrestricted, and consequently he is not inclined to treat the information skeptically; neither is he inclined to seek out alternative news sources. The public accepts information on the conflict and the adversary almost without reservation, and does not seek confirmation from additional sources nor apply independent criticism. In times of crisis, Jewish Israelis tend to perceive foreign sources of information as anti-Israeli or anti-Semitic. In non-democratic regimes, the media overtly serves the establishment. The media consumers are conscious of this, and they filter information according to their views. In other words, in non-democratic regimes media manipulation is absolute but transparent. Conversely, in democratic societies the media's impact rests on its ability to construct a picture of reality. Practically, the media maintains a degree of freedom of action, and certainly does not take orders from the government. But the news products it creates may ultimately reflect the regime's position in deep and fundamental ways. In contrast with non-democratic regimes, this fact itself is not transparent. The Israeli public is indeed a potential target for broad media manipulation, though it perceives itself as being exposed to diverse, professional sources of information.
B. Lack of Interparetive Alternative: In a democratic system, it is the media's practice in times of conflict to present the news within a relatively narrow interpretive framework. Consequently the public is not exposed to a diversity of possible interpretations. Often, the information is presented in a way that creates an emotional knee -jerk reaction: "our side" is presented in a patriotic light as the side that is justified, wronged, and threatened; the side who, through no fault of its own, is being attacked by the murderous other side. This emotional framework does not allow media consumers to consider other ways of interpreting the information they receive nor to understand the conflict's significance and complexity.
C. Flow of negative information: By nature, news is constructed first and foremost upon drama: sensations, conflicts, and disorder. Demonstrations, violence, crime, war and catastrophe are the most natural raw materials for news reporting. Usually, reports on the conflict are dramatized as well, by focusing on parties' irreconcilable disputes, radical positions and impassioned statements, violent and ominous events, or results of zero-sum games. Moreover, studies show that in a violent ethnic conflict, news serves as an important forum for expression of public hatred towards the enemy, and for reflecting and strengthening stereotypes. The Israeli media treats the Palestinians as enemies, first and foremost. The primary emphases of coverage of the Palestinian side are the threat they pose and the actions taken by the state to curtail this threat. Other topics regarding the "enemy", such as Palestinian daily life, Palestinian suffering and casualties, have almost no place in the usual media coverage. In the long term, each party's exposure to upsetting images and stories about the cruel, dangerous and murderous enemies on the other side has a huge impact on the public perception of the adversary.
D. Ethonocentrism: Any country's media coverage, especially that of a state facing violent conflict such as Israel, is inclined to ethnocentrism. Coverage focuses primarily on what is going on within the nation and the state in which the media operates, and less on what is happening to other nations elsewhere. The Israeli media reports mainly about what is happening in Israel. Its news sources are also limited: the reporters are Israelis, mostly Jews, and their sources for coverage of the conflict are almost exclusively members of the political and military leadership in Israel. Thus a closed circle of interpretation is created: Israelis talking to Israelis about Palestinians.
Research Methodology
Keshev's studies address the disparities between the information reporters provide their editors and the edited, processed story created for the readers and viewers in printed and televised news headlines. While reporters often provide diverse, complex and relatively complete information on the conflict, the editing process frequently creates headlines and front pages that are one-dimensional and devoid of complexity. Reports that do not concur with the headlines are relegated to back pages or buried deep within news programs. The aim of Keshev's research is not to compare the coverage to an absolute, "correct" portrayal of reality. The comparative analysis is done within the text, studying all the materials released in all the media under scrutiny, and comparing them with the central messages actually conveyed by news editors to news consumers. There are two primary reasons for this:
First, despite extensive news consumption in Israel, the average reader actually devotes no more than a few minutes to reading the paper. He skims the articles, goes over the front page headlines and glances at the photos in order to understand the general picture. Therefore, when an article's headline does not reflect the report's complexity, presumably many readers are not being exposed to the components of reality described in the article's text. Moreover, the reader's interpretation of the articles is influenced by his reading of the headlines. The headlines determine the context in which reality is to be interpreted; within this context the range of possible interpretations narrows significantly.
Second, newspaper consumers assign objective significance to the differentiation between the front pages and the rest of the paper. The back pages and the daily and weekend supplements are perceived as suppliers of "soft" news, unusual stories, amusing curiosities, in-depth interviews, commentaries, personal columns and the like. When reading these sections of the paper, readers expect texts that are more subjective and more personal, and they read them with the appropriate amount of skepticism .But the front news pages are perceived as supplying hard news -- factual, condensed reporting of yesterday's events, and few readers will treat them with comparable distrust. Similarly, in television newscasts, the earlier in the program a story is aired, the higher its news value in the viewer's eyes. Consequently, airing a news story at the end of a broadcast or in the back pages of the paper lowers its factual credibility in the eyes of the consumer. Placement of other materials in headlines of the newscast or the front pages of the paper, "turns them" into hard facts over which no doubts are cast.
Keshev's research methodology takes apart the story supplied by the reporter, treating all parts of the paper equally, without taking into account placement or headlines. We examine whether a new, more complex, more complete and more balanced story may be composed, based upon the material that appeared in journalists' reports, in each of the paper's sections. This examination facilitates exposure to editing practices that prevented news consumers from getting complex presentation of the story from the outset.
Data collection for the study begins with a systematic analysis and classification of all reports and articles in the papers and TV news broadcasts. Classification of items relates to three primary aspects of editing:
A. The relationship between the report and the full text, focusing on the following parameters: the report's placement, its graphic prominence, any accompanying photographs, references to the report on the front page or newscast headlines, and the relationship between different reports in the same issue.
B. The relationship between the report's content and its headline: the type of information contained in the headline, the factual relationship between the headline and the content, the headline's rhetoric, construction of responsibility for the event in the headline, construction of the report's factuality in the headline, construction of messages via visual symbols (e.g., color, photo).
C. The relationship between reports in various media: the same parameters are examined while comparing a given day's papers and newscasts.
These parameters' relative relevance changes from topic to topic and from one time period to the next. Their analysis helps identify patterns in media coverage such as the disparity between a report's content and its headline, an issue's systematic presentation in commentary or in the back pages of the newspaper rather than in the news pages, and so on. These patterns impair media consumers' exposure to the complexity of events, and facilitates biased construction of information, in a way that often corresponds with the establishment's conventional perception of reality.
Keshev's research team examines editing patterns in newspapers and newscasts over several weeks, as dictated by the topic. The analysis is comprehensive, not based only on sampling, and covers all the papers and central news broadcasts. In addition, we examine all reports, articles, interviews, commentary and supplements that touch upon the issue in any way and that were released during the same period. This kind of analysis allows longitudinal monitoring of various issues and of recurring editing practices.
The topics Keshev has chosen to address all relate to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Typically, several problematic editing practices emerge from each subject analysis. The examination of these patterns is done in view of the research questions that guide the analysis of news material. A few prime examples:
A. Political coverage: To what extent does the Israeli media allow exposure to Palestinian positions on the issue? To what extent does it demonstrate the complexity of Palestinian society, political forces operating within in, and the disagreements between them? How does the media relate to moderate Palestinian statements and how does it relate to radical ones? How does the media relate to the Israeli side in regard to all these issues and what can be learned from this comparison?
B. Palestinian suffering and Israeli suffering: How does the Israeli media define Palestinian suffering and Israeli suffering? Is it presented in terms of a personal, specific story? Is there an attempt being made to understand the full meaning of suffering as a source of frustration, hatred and violence? Who does the media hold responsible for the suffering? To what extent does the media address Palestinian and Israeli victims' personal stories? What are the points of difference and similarity between the coverage of Palestinian suffering and that of Israeli suffering, and what can be learned from this comparison?
C. Coverage of news events from the field: Is coverage of an event involving Israeli and Palestinians based on a similar number of information sources from both sides? Which Palestinian sources are recognized as bona fide sources of information? On which issues are Palestinian sources heard and on which are they absent? Are they quoted verbatim or referred to in the reporter's words? To what extent are Palestinian sources considered reliable? How does the Israeli media relate to Israeli sources as regards these issues and what can be learned form this comparison?
Studies of the type conducted by Keshev have a central, extraordinary role in the monitoring of information that the Israeli media consumer receives regarding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the Palestinian side. To date, the findings of Keshev's studies indicate problematic editing practices that perpetuate negative stereotypes and create a distorted portrayal of the situation for Israeli media consumers.
|
