UN headquarters in New York

Mainstream journalist defends western bias

Slant Index: 6.92 (vote)

Email this story

Reuters' UN correspondent Evelyn Leopold defended her and other mainstream journalists' western bias by saying she and her colleagues are from the west. She also criticized some journalists that she said had different biases and an agenda.

At a recent UN Security Council briefing on the investigation into the assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafiq Hariri, Ms. Leopold reportedly interrupted a Muslim Weekly reporter by saying "Next question, next question" when the reporter asked if the UN investigation was considering outside claims of Israeli involvement.

Ms. Leopold denied saying anything, but said the question (quoted below) shouldn't have been directed to UN Chief Prosecutor Serge Brammertz who presided over the briefing, nor any other UN official.

Muslim Weekly's question: "There was a statement issued today by Hezbollah that they would support a UN Tribunal if it is "fair, just and nonpolitical", so what about the Israeli Mossad spy ring that was uncovered in Lebanon that outside investigators claim is linked to the Hariri killing? What is the UN doing in this regard to investigate?"

After cnnX re-read the above question and emphasized the newsworthiness of Hezbollah's statement--anouncing conditional support for the UN's Hariri investigation, a major concession to western demands--Leopold then agreed it was a fair question.


Eastern News

Unlike most western news agencies, eastern news outlets such as the 'Asia Times' and 'Islam Online' have reported speculation on Israeli involvement in the Hariri assassination, as well as Syrian involvement.

Asia Times: "Significantly, one of Hariri's consultants, Mustafa al-Naser, told Iranian state news agency IRNA on Monday that "the assassination of Hariri is the Israeli intelligence agency Mossad's job, aimed at creating political tension in Lebanon". An array of Arab Middle East analysts, as well as the Lebanese government, point out that the blast was eerily similar to previous Israeli-orchestrated bombings against former Palestinian leaders."

Islam Online: "Abu Emad Al-Refaai, the representative of the Palestinian Islamic Jihad group in Lebanon... [said] “This crime plays well into the hands of Israel.”


cnnX editorial

The Reuters correspondent's apparent knee-jerk interruption to quell speculation of Israeli involvement in the Hariri killing at a UN Security Council press briefing was an unusual, but clear representation of bias in the US news media. And according to Muslim Weekly's Trish Shuh, a majority of US correspondents at the UN share Leopold's pro-western slant.

It wasn't long ago when US news correspondents wrote story after story convincing a majority of Americans that Saddam Hussein was linked to the 9/11 attacks and other falsehoods. After a careful and well orchestrated misinformation campaign by the Bush administration, with invaluable assistance from US correspondents, American public support for war with Iraq grew to a level acceptable to the US law makers who voted in favor of the invasion.

If adequate, but unpopular questions had been asked before our invasion of Iraq, the misinformation may have been exposed and the war perhaps avoided. This bears repeating. If mainstream journalists did their job, the Iraq war may have been avoided.

The lessons learned from the careless pre-war reporting must be heeded by correspondents writing about today's hot-spots. And when writing about inflammatory topics such as the Hariri investigation, US news correspondents should not let biases or a group-think mentality affect their reporting or impede the work of their colleagues.

Full CNN Story
cnnEXPOSED.com - Email this page to a friend

© 2004-2010 cnnEXPOSED.com