Subscribers Say Newspaper Has Slanted Middle East Coverage

AP ^ | April 18, 2002

[TomGuy]

Subscribers Say Newspaper Has Slanted Middle East Coverage

The Associated Press

Published: Apr 18, 2002

LOS ANGELES (AP) - About 1,000 people have suspended their subscriptions to the Los Angeles Times, claiming the newspaper's coverage of unrest in the Middle East is biased toward the Palestinians.

Times officials said in Thursday's editions that they began receiving numerous calls Monday about their reporting of the Middle East conflict. About 900 calls were logged Wednesday, but not all of the people requested suspensions.

The protest reportedly was organized in the local Jewish community and was timed to correspond with Tuesday's 50th anniversary of Israeli independence.

Dr. Joe Englanoff, a physician at UCLA Medical Center, said the Southern California Jewish community began talking about a protest against the newspaper several weeks ago.

"There's a feeling in the community that The Times clearly has been one-sided and biased in its reporting about the Middle East. People in the Jewish community want to express their anger," Englanoff said.

Times Editor John Carroll said that the newspaper has devoted a large staff of reporters and photographers to report on the Middle East tensions.

"Our goal is to provide coverage that is both fair and complete," he said. "We feel that we serve our readership by covering all aspects and points of view."

Times officials said they could not provide precise figures on the number of delivery suspensions, but said the orders amount to less than one-tenth of 1 percent of the paper's total daily circulation of slightly more than 1 million.

AP-ES-04-18-02 0759EDT

[TomGuy]

LA Times biased? I am shocked, shocked, I tell ya!

"Our goal is to provide coverage that is both fair and complete," he said. "We feel that we serve our readership by covering all aspects and points of view."

Well, now, see... they "feel," so they aren't bad guys.

[elfman2]

Protests like this always backfire unless there's an overwhelming majority that agree with the protesters. If this were anything but a newspaper, I'd guess that there's just enough support to make it work. But an old axiom is to never get into a public argument with someone who buys ink by the barrel.

[dennisw]

Ef 'em! And go watch FoxNews.

[mykdsmom]

So sad that it's only 1000.

MKM

[Redbob]

"But an old axiom is to never get into a public argument with someone who buys ink by the barrel."

The value of that axiom needs to be adjusted: there's some value also in buying videotape by the truckload.
If Fox News for example were to highlight this dispute and side with the protesters, the fight won't necessarily go to the guys with the inkstains.

[Cicero]

It's only a small number, and they've only "suspended" their subscriptions. But the charge of antisemitism is a very grave one. If I were running the LA Times (and thank God I'm not) I would see this as a warning shot across the bows, a sign of deep trouble ahead if they don't watch out.

It would not do the LA Times's reputation any good among their liberal readers if they were to find themselves associated with antisemitism, Hitler, and the Holocaust. That's a pretty big shadow looming on their PR horizon.

[elfman2]

"If Fox News for example were to highlight this dispute and side with the protesters, the fight won't necessarily go to the guys with the inkstains. "

But it's not Fox New's against the LA Times. It's some other group organizing it. Fox may give them 5 minutes of favorable coverage 3 times a day for a week. But that's dispersed across the county. The LA times can "take the high ground" and claim victimization every day on any page for just as long as they want. They can focus their attention locally, and they can turn this free publicity by getting other local media involved. There's no comparison.

[Catspaw]

They ought to follow it up with ad cancellations--that's where the real money is in the newspaper biz. If everyone who supports Israel would cancel their ads for a week, even a day, the newspaper would take a substantial hit.

[Former_russian]

Kalifornia newspaper is biased. Film at 11.

[Hildy]

1,000 is what the LA Times is copping to. Who knows how many have cancelled. I'm happy to hear this.

[besieged]

I am one of the 1000. In addition, I am emailing every company I see advertising in that crummy paper and telling them why I am any of my friends are boycotting their products.

I also informed the LA times of this via email. Needless to say, I am yet to get a response. Unfortunately, I do not have enough influence with all my buddies to get them to do the same thing. Oh well... even a journey of 1000 miles starts with the 1st step.

[Shermy]

I see the paper on the internet. I agree, and it's important to make clear that it's not just "reporting" the other side, but spinning anything Arafat, et al. says is true, while questioning anything Israel says. There's a writer named Wilkinson who spins and spins, and calls her opinions "News Analysis." The editorials are childish, generally on both sides, and lefty reactionary. They've bought every line by the P.A. They have snide remarks about Jews and always seem to have some jewish crackpot to give "another view." It's leftist agenda journalism, with no care about the people.

Not pointing out that it's not just "balanced" reporting or reporting "the other side" is important.