Ask A Mensch, A Mensch On Every Topic

10 Comments on “Which news broadcasts are considered to be reliable to Pro-Israel people?”

1. manydifferentinterests
   February 6th, 2010 at 6:17 pm

   Which ones are better? No one is totally reliable, but who is better then the ones usually quoted here?

   Fox News, and the Yated Ne’eman and the Hamodia, and the Jewish Press also The New York Post.
   These are all "better" then the ones usually quoted.

   Any source which at least 30% of the time or so, has GOOD things to say about Israel, would be not necessarily reliable but at least probably not antisemitic.

   Although an individual article, still very well might be; Especially if their sources for that article are not well researched and verified for absolute accuracy and not just "Everyone I questioned at the hate Israel rally all said it was true".

   If the story is about Orthodox Jews then get THEIR side of the story.
   It the story is about the Israeli army, then get the Armys side of it, and NOT just from the most dissatisfied soldiers who automatically side with everything said by leftists like Haaretz.

   And then PUT their side of the story into the article without trying to twist it to seem to be saying something other then THAT persons exact and COMPLETE words.

   That is what a RELIABLE and fair journalist would do.

   And when I say GOOD I mean the kinds of things that if they were said about any other group. That, that group, would be proud and happy to have that said about them.

   For example; A publication that would priase Israels producing so many scientists who have produced new medicines and technologies that have benifited the world instead of the lies where Jews are falsly called "parasites" and said to be "lazy and thieving" etc…

   Publications that produce fake quotes by people like Ben Gurion or produce fake Talmud quotes from antisemitic liars like Israel Shahak and nazi websites like Stormfront, could never in a million years EVER be considered reliable.

   Even Isreali sources which will not criticise the lies told about Orthodox Jews and which in fact do nothing BUT lie about Orthodox Jews, cannot EVER be considered reliable.

   The same is true for CBS and CNN the New York Times etc…which never have anything positive to say about
   Israel and every rocket attack is seen by them as something "jusitified", but every capture by Israel or killing of any attacking terrorist is something they ALWAYS spin as "evil", thus constantly implying that Israel has no right to ever, defend itself under ANY circumstances.

   Also any publication or broadcast outlet or website or youtube video or wikipedia entry, etc…which makes this "moral equivelency garbage" with stories about how the terrorists ‘only’ killed so many Jews, but Israel killed many more terrorists, as if there is some kind of rule in war applying ONLY to Israel and no one else, that enemies may attack and kill as many Jews as they want and the Jews are ALWAYS "evil" for fighting back, but get an EXTRA criticism for killing more of the attackers as if some should be let go for "balancing" purposes.

   Also the antisemitic ones do not EVER criticise other countries for doing what they falsely accuse Israel of supposedly doing.
   For example they pretend to worry about dozens or even hundreds "Palestiniens" killed by Israel over the years but never ever have anything EVER to say about the fact that Egypt and Jordan between them have killed over 70 thousand.

   But that is just fine because Jews can’t be blamed for it.

   Edit; You often can’t provide reliable sources to prove something is biased.
   If I posted for example some claim that someone had said
   "I live with the terrorists because I love bombing Jewish children and none of us cares about land or fairness, we just love to see Jews dying becaus it’s fun and that is the reason ALL of us are doing it".

   And I made up a name and made up a publication and put in any old date as to when that terrorist said that, what possible source could you ever provide to prove this terrorist didn’t exist or if he does exist what source could you provide to prove he never said it?

   Note to the violations review section; If you remove this answer as a supposed "violation" (which it isn’t) while leaving up the TRUE violations viciously attacking Jews and telling such blatant lies about Jews you are then publicly admitting that you actively support and promote antisemitism and you’re system of reporting was created only to make sure the lies about Jews, can be freely posted and no one would have the right or ability to refute those lies.
   References :

2. dandyl
   February 6th, 2010 at 6:56 pm

   To answer you, the best one is Honest reporting,HonestReporting: a fast-action website that monitors Mideast media bias and ensures that Israel receives fair worldwide press coverage.
   http://www.honestreporting.com
   Haaretz is very good as well
   jpost.com
   http://www.israelnewsagency.com
   http://www.ynetnews.com/home/0,7340,L-3083,00.html
   References :

3. Michelangelo
   February 6th, 2010 at 7:34 pm

   If i would accuse any source for being biased, then i would definitely provide my reliable sources to prove wrong the biased one! The members who complain about unreliable sources are the same who never posted any sources at all! Maybe because they consider their rant to be the most reliable one!

   I would call that ignorance
   References :

4. ai21
   February 6th, 2010 at 8:02 pm

   Israeli newspapers:
   Haaretz is the MOST biased newspaper in Israel, along with Ultra-Orthodox newspapers. people buy it BECAUSE it is biased and show them the world as they view it.

   Jerusalem post, which is published in English only is considered relatively unbiased.
   mainstream Israeli newspapers, like Yediot Achronot(YNET.co.il) and maariv (NRG.co.il) are much more popular and less biased, but leaning to the left.

   Israel today, the second in circulation newspaper is considered even less biased, but leaning to the right.

   world press:
   BBC is known to publish anti-Israeli articles without proper validation. during the Lebanon war and Gaza conflict, it was even more biased the Arab networks.

   CNN reporter for the middle east cried bitterly when Yaser Arafet died, calling him dear friend. showing deep emotional attachment to one side. an unbiased network can’t choose such a reporter and expect it’s articles to be unbiased.

   Fox news is considered less biased, showing both sides of the issue.
   USA today is also very respectable and unbiased newspaper, along with any other media who bother to APOLOGIZE when it’s articles are found to be unbased.
   in this respect American media is much more professional then other global or local media.

   to sum things up:
   Israel today is the Hebrew newspaper of choice
   Jerusalem post and American newspapers are the English newpapers of choice,
   and Fox news is the broadcast network of choice.
   References :

5. Annt Hu DeShalit
   February 6th, 2010 at 8:17 pm

   Israel National News (Arutz 7) is the most reliable.

   Ha’aretz is only slightly pro-Israel and ordinarily lines up with the far left.

   .
   References :

6. Ivri_Anokhi
   February 6th, 2010 at 8:42 pm

   DebkaFile has the most reliable news about Israel and the Middle East.

   Things that they report only appear on ordinary media days or weeks later.

   .
   References :
   http://www.debka.com/index1.php

7. Expert
   February 6th, 2010 at 9:30 pm

   Arutz 7.

   Jerusalem Post is second.

   Ynet is a far third.
   References :

8. jd
   February 6th, 2010 at 10:18 pm

   I don’t trust any of them. They are all commercial and profit oriented.
   References :

9. Satan Jr.
   February 6th, 2010 at 10:24 pm

   BBC, CNN, Cbs and all those hate Israel. They’re not reliable. The only one who is reliable to me is the news in Israel, because they don’t just say the negative stuff about Israel.
   References :

10. Jon
    February 6th, 2010 at 10:47 pm

    I haven’t read a single news source that I trust. All of them are biased.
    References :

Leave a Reply