Why is journalism in Syria held to a different standard? - opinion

The bust of brutal former Syrian dictator Hafez al-Assad fell forward off its pedestal and then down, straight onto the top of a chain-link fence.

The dictator’s eyes, which had seen the unbridled massacres he ordered, hit the top of the metal fence, causing a loud clang.

“Praise to God,” the Syrian who pushed the statue exclaimed in gratitude.

The 22-second video [of the act] was one of several clips of statues of Assad family members joyfully pushed to the ground posted on Instagram since the coup began by Qutayba Yasin, a Syrian journalist working for Syria TV, a Turkish-based pro-opposition Syrian television network.

But this clip was different than all the others because the man who pushed the statue was wearing a vest clearly marked PRESS in English.

The video is jarring for anyone trained in journalism because that vest is supposed to be sacrosanct. The moment one puts on that vest, one stops being a patriot or an activist and starts being a journalist.

These correspondents are supposed to be reporting on and documenting historical moments, not perpetrating them. They are the press, not the proletariat.

You might scoff and say those journalistic ethics still may hold true where I’m from in the Midwest, but not for the mayhem in the Middle East. However, this troubled region is exactly where the media needs to be held to a higher standard.

There is one more disturbing irony about the video.

The journalist who posted it works for a media outlet based in Istanbul.

As Herb Keinon reminded the world media in this newspaper, Turkey has been occupying some 9,000 square kilometers of northern Syria since 2016.

Why has the international media been silent all that time? Where were the United Nations resolutions and the complaints to the International Criminal Court? Where has the outrage over that occupation been for eight years?

Anyone who reads The Jerusalem Post knows the answer. That outrage has been aimed at Israel. 

As a measure of international interest in the plight of Syrians under Assad: When I worked for the AP (2006-2011), we had about 40 staffers covering the Israeli-Palestinian story. In Syria we had one regime-approved stringer https://t.co/e8btUtlj4y

— Matti Friedman (@MattiFriedman) December 10, 2024

Former Associated Press (AP) journalist Matti Friedman illustrated the double standard on his X account this week.

“As a measure of international interest in the plight of Syrians under Assad,” Friedman wrote, “when I worked for the AP (2006-2011), we had about 40 staffers covering the Israeli-Palestinian story. In Syria, we had one regime-approved stringer.”

There are plenty more journalists covering Syria now, of course. But are they reporting fairly?

Are journalists covering Syria reporting fairly?

It is very simple to check. On the Internet, when you click on an article about Syria, press Control-F and browse to see if Israel is mentioned. If it is, then see if Turkey is there, too.

LET’S START with CNN shortly after Bashar al-Assad was overthrown. This was its headline: “Watching with trepidation and glee, Netanyahu orders military to seize Syria buffer zone.”

I covered Netanyahu day in and day out for nearly a quarter of a century and never saw any reason to use the word “glee” to describe how he felt about anything. Now try Control-F-ing the CNN article, and it’s unfortunately as Turkey-less as a vegan Thanksgiving dinner.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by HonestReporting (@honestreporting)

Other articles by CNN and elsewhere painted Israel’s temporary control over a security zone on Mount Hermon as a greedy land grab, and its air force destroying Assad’s chemical weapons and fighter jets as harming peace prospects.

The Guardian’s headline was “Israel strikes Syria as Netanyahu approves plan to expand Golan Heights settlement.” The sub-headline wasn’t much better, contrasting what Netanyahu was doing to “double Israeli population in occupied Golan Heights” with the “Syria rebel leader’s pledge of peace.”

Brought to you by the same BBC correspondent who argued that "calling someone a terrorist means you're taking sides and ceasing to treat the situation with due impartiality."So Hamas aren't terrorists and Assad isn't wicked or a "traditional dictator?"Make it make sense. https://t.co/8JvCLpRFzc

— HonestReporting (@HonestReporting) December 8, 2024

The media watchdog HonestReporting mocked veteran anti-Israel BBC anchor John Simpson for calling Assad “weak rather than wicked” and “meek and anxious to please – the reverse of a traditional dictator.”

“Brought to you by the same BBC correspondent who argued that ‘calling someone a terrorist means you’re taking sides and ceasing to treat the situation with due impartiality,’” HonestReporting posted. “So Hamas aren’t terrorists, and Assad isn’t wicked or a traditional dictator?”

Anti-Israel agitator Mehdi Hasan, who is no longer at MSNBC due to his extreme views, wrote on social media that it is “insane that Israel [is] carrying out hundreds of airstrikes on Syria, and no Western leader will say a word.”

HonestReporting responded to Hasan that Syrian rebels have vowed to march on Jerusalem and questioned why he thought they should have chemical and conventional weapons.

The Committee to Protect Journalists, which has obsessively condemned Israel throughout the current war, finally shifted to paying attention to Syria after busying itself with such exploits as “calling on Israel to end its sanctions against Haaretz.” 

On December 11, the CPJ “called on [Syrian rebel] authorities to take decisive action to ensure the safety of all journalists and hold accountable those responsible for the killing, imprisonment, and silencing of members of the media during the country’s 13-year civil war.”

If the CPJ had been nearly as vigilant about Syria as it has been about the world’s only Jewish state, perhaps American journalist Austin Tice would not have been languishing in a Syrian prison since his kidnapping in 2012.

THE FRIGHTENING revelations of what has been happening for decades at the Sednaya Prison north of Damascus prove more than ever that the international media failed to do its job by not telling the world what was going on in its torture chambers.

From acid baths to human squashers, the media missed a massive story while it was so busy falsely accusing Israel of human rights violations. The fact that Assad is still free to travel the world with no International Criminal Court warrant for his arrest should trouble anyone with any moral compass. 

Nellie Bowles called out pro-Assad journalists and activists in The Free Press under the headline “I guess Assad was bad.” She singled out the likes of Max Blumenthal, Ali Abunimah, and Rania Khalek.

“Many American journalists and public officials made their whole careers by being soft on Assad,” she wrote. “That was their schtick (no need to name names, but here they are). Now, with Assad out, people are saying Assad was bad.

“At least be consistent: Go visit your man in Russia, Tucker [Carlson] style! The UN chief called Assad’s reign a ‘dictatorial regime’ for the first time ever. It’s so easy taking the moral high ground after the prison pics come out.”

Bowles is exactly right. Hypocrisy is what happens when too much of the media put their biases before their responsibilities as journalists.

They end up looking like that guy in Syria wearing the press vest, toppling that statue with – glee.

There, I used that word. 

The writer is the executive director of the pro-Israel media watchdog HonestReporting. He served as chief political correspondent and analyst of The Jerusalem Post for 24 years.