I figured there was going to be a widespread, uniform, coordinated campaign by the Hasbara Unit which is in what is, or used to be called, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to control the 2nd anniversary observance? acknowledgement? of Oct. 7th. From local to national media in the United States, that has proven to be the case, essentially consisting of a narrowed focus on a Hamas terrorist attack on Israelis on that day. No mention whatsoever of the previous hundred years of history leading up to that date.
More specifically, as well as inadvertently revealing of the plot, was a 4,000 word piece in the Opinions section of the Boston Globe on Oct. 7th by the editor of the editorial page himself [It can be found here https://www.bostonglobe.com/2025/10/07/opinion/israel-gaza-oct-7-two-years-later/?p1=BGSearch_Advanced_Results, possibly behind a paywall]. Titled "Israel's fractured soul," it was a Rick Steves-like tour of Israeli reactions to the anniversary, which of course bears no relevance to the actual history attending the event, but that's the point - it's the Israeli experience and viewpoint that matters, nothing else does.
Case in point, there was only one rather incidental reference to the Nakba, and not one use of the word "genocide," save in the form of "genocidal," used to describe a woman originally from England who fell in love with Israel after multiple visits and decided to move there to raise a family 18 years ago: "She abhors the war, but said that she also feels anguish when her progressive friends back home lash out at Israel as a genocidal state." "'Our beautiful country has become a pariah state,' she told me."
That there should be any doubt as to the orientation of this editor regarding how to observe this 2nd anniversary of Oct. 7th is dispelled by his witless? blithe? unselfconscious? disclosure at the end of his travelogue through Israel, "Reporting for this piece was sponsored in part by the American Middle East Press Association."
Now the American Middle East Press Association (ampress.org) says of itself:
- [It] is "focused on fostering a deeper understanding of Israel and enhancing comprehensive coverage of Israel within the broader context of the Middle East among American media," whatever that last phrase means.
- "We serve as a vital resource to U.S. based media including national broadcast, online, and print news organizations – connecting them with esteemed experts, diplomats, elected officials, top military and NGO authorities."
- "AMEPA regularly provides media professionals throughout the U.S. with news, facts, background information, research, and analysis. We facilitate journalist-access to experts and officials, organize press briefings in America."
- And apparently with a straight face, "AMEPA is staunchly non-partisan and is not affiliated with any governmental entity. It serves as a trusted resource for journalists looking for experts and spokespeople on the current conflict – and in the not-too-distant future, beyond," again whatever that last phrase means.
So there you have it, the editor, no less, of the Boston Globe editorial page having no qualms whatsoever over selling whatever journalistic scruples he has (had) to run a propaganda piece for Israel in a major United States media market. Technically, he is in violation of at least two proscriptions of the Society of Professional Journalists Code of Ethics third principle, "Act Independently," to wit:
- "Refuse gifts, favors, fees, free travel and special treatment, and avoid political and other outside activities that may compromise integrity or impartiality, or may damage credibility."
- "Deny favored treatment to advertisers, donors or any other special interests, and resist internal and external pressure to influence coverage."
The Code contains three other principles, of which this editor has run afoul on many other counts, as well as a Preamble, which states, "Members of the Society of Professional Journalists believe that public enlightenment is the forerunner of justice and the foundation of democracy. Ethical journalism strives to ensure the free exchange of information that is accurate, fair and thorough."
I have elderly ex-friends whose idea of Israel became unchangeable - it will, for them, forever be 'a plucky little state, eternally threatened by infidel fuzzy wuzzies' - by the media's celebration of the pre-emptive 1967 land grab. It is so much easier to cling to old ideas than to think a new one through. It has taken a genocide to begin to open some minds. It is especially sad that the BBC's is so obviously not one of them.
Bowen’s assertion that the BBC is “the best source of decent, impartial reportage anywhere in the world” is almost as ridiculous as Israel’s propaganda that the IDF is “the most moral army in the world.” Both statements invert the truth and are completely detached from reality.
The BBC, its executives, and star reporters appear oblivious to the damage they have done to their brand and credibility as a result of their completely biased coverage of the Genocide in Gaza. Their bias runs deep and their reputation is now worthless and derisible. Amazing to see a once great institution brought to its knees.
By now there is no point lamenting what should be very obvious: racism and white supremacy are an endemic problem in the so called west.
It's not a matter of lack of money or education or exposure - some of the most virulent of these white supremacists are the leaders in the media, business, politics etc. They have no shortage of creativity and words within which they persistently pack in the same message: some of us are the chosen people, and most people on the earth are worth nothing to us.
It took me a long time to re-train my brain to not trust the BBC. It was so instinctive to go there for the news when I was younger. Born in the UK in the 70's for context.
I figured there was going to be a widespread, uniform, coordinated campaign by the Hasbara Unit which is in what is, or used to be called, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to control the 2nd anniversary observance? acknowledgement? of Oct. 7th. From local to national media in the United States, that has proven to be the case, essentially consisting of a narrowed focus on a Hamas terrorist attack on Israelis on that day. No mention whatsoever of the previous hundred years of history leading up to that date.
More specifically, as well as inadvertently revealing of the plot, was a 4,000 word piece in the Opinions section of the Boston Globe on Oct. 7th by the editor of the editorial page himself [It can be found here https://www.bostonglobe.com/2025/10/07/opinion/israel-gaza-oct-7-two-years-later/?p1=BGSearch_Advanced_Results, possibly behind a paywall]. Titled "Israel's fractured soul," it was a Rick Steves-like tour of Israeli reactions to the anniversary, which of course bears no relevance to the actual history attending the event, but that's the point - it's the Israeli experience and viewpoint that matters, nothing else does.
Case in point, there was only one rather incidental reference to the Nakba, and not one use of the word "genocide," save in the form of "genocidal," used to describe a woman originally from England who fell in love with Israel after multiple visits and decided to move there to raise a family 18 years ago: "She abhors the war, but said that she also feels anguish when her progressive friends back home lash out at Israel as a genocidal state." "'Our beautiful country has become a pariah state,' she told me."
That there should be any doubt as to the orientation of this editor regarding how to observe this 2nd anniversary of Oct. 7th is dispelled by his witless? blithe? unselfconscious? disclosure at the end of his travelogue through Israel, "Reporting for this piece was sponsored in part by the American Middle East Press Association."
Now the American Middle East Press Association (ampress.org) says of itself:
- [It] is "focused on fostering a deeper understanding of Israel and enhancing comprehensive coverage of Israel within the broader context of the Middle East among American media," whatever that last phrase means.
- "We serve as a vital resource to U.S. based media including national broadcast, online, and print news organizations – connecting them with esteemed experts, diplomats, elected officials, top military and NGO authorities."
- "AMEPA regularly provides media professionals throughout the U.S. with news, facts, background information, research, and analysis. We facilitate journalist-access to experts and officials, organize press briefings in America."
- And apparently with a straight face, "AMEPA is staunchly non-partisan and is not affiliated with any governmental entity. It serves as a trusted resource for journalists looking for experts and spokespeople on the current conflict – and in the not-too-distant future, beyond," again whatever that last phrase means.
So there you have it, the editor, no less, of the Boston Globe editorial page having no qualms whatsoever over selling whatever journalistic scruples he has (had) to run a propaganda piece for Israel in a major United States media market. Technically, he is in violation of at least two proscriptions of the Society of Professional Journalists Code of Ethics third principle, "Act Independently," to wit:
- "Refuse gifts, favors, fees, free travel and special treatment, and avoid political and other outside activities that may compromise integrity or impartiality, or may damage credibility."
- "Deny favored treatment to advertisers, donors or any other special interests, and resist internal and external pressure to influence coverage."
The Code contains three other principles, of which this editor has run afoul on many other counts, as well as a Preamble, which states, "Members of the Society of Professional Journalists believe that public enlightenment is the forerunner of justice and the foundation of democracy. Ethical journalism strives to ensure the free exchange of information that is accurate, fair and thorough."
Happy anniversary!
I have elderly ex-friends whose idea of Israel became unchangeable - it will, for them, forever be 'a plucky little state, eternally threatened by infidel fuzzy wuzzies' - by the media's celebration of the pre-emptive 1967 land grab. It is so much easier to cling to old ideas than to think a new one through. It has taken a genocide to begin to open some minds. It is especially sad that the BBC's is so obviously not one of them.
Bowen’s assertion that the BBC is “the best source of decent, impartial reportage anywhere in the world” is almost as ridiculous as Israel’s propaganda that the IDF is “the most moral army in the world.” Both statements invert the truth and are completely detached from reality.
The BBC, its executives, and star reporters appear oblivious to the damage they have done to their brand and credibility as a result of their completely biased coverage of the Genocide in Gaza. Their bias runs deep and their reputation is now worthless and derisible. Amazing to see a once great institution brought to its knees.
By now there is no point lamenting what should be very obvious: racism and white supremacy are an endemic problem in the so called west.
It's not a matter of lack of money or education or exposure - some of the most virulent of these white supremacists are the leaders in the media, business, politics etc. They have no shortage of creativity and words within which they persistently pack in the same message: some of us are the chosen people, and most people on the earth are worth nothing to us.
It took me a long time to re-train my brain to not trust the BBC. It was so instinctive to go there for the news when I was younger. Born in the UK in the 70's for context.
BOWen WOW WOW...