September 13, 2001

11:22 AM

Footage of Celebrating Palestinians Racially BiasedHere's a "voice in the wilderness." The writer argues that the media running this footage is reminiscent of how the media ran footage of African Americans looting in L.A. in 1992, calling them hoodlums and vandals, without thinking about or providing the context of the Rodney King verdict. PROTECT YOUR FELLOW AMERICANS OF COLOR.
posted by prozaction (38 comments total)

No no no no no. When some gold ol' boys shoot themselves up some A-rabs, I certainly do not need someone to "put that into context." Evil is evil.

Rejoicing over a terrorist act is wrong.
Looting and killing is wrong.
Victimizing innocents because of their race is wrong.

I need no context.
posted by marknau at 11:29 AM on September 13, 2001

Give me a break! Did you consider the source? The "Electronic Intifada"!? It's just another example of towel-headed spin doctors trying to play on the sympathies of an already emotionally raw public. They will get no sympathy from me!
posted by JeffK at 11:29 AM on September 13, 2001

One is a hoodlum and a vandal when one acts as one regardless of the color of ones skin.
posted by revbrian at 11:29 AM on September 13, 2001

Criminy Joe...your source is an Intifada website? I should accuse you of portraying all pro Palestinians as complete idiots.
posted by username at 11:30 AM on September 13, 2001

Your use of a stereotyping epithet is not acceptable behavior in this forum, JeffK.
posted by sudama at 11:35 AM on September 13, 2001

t's just another example of towel-headed spin doctors trying to play on the sympathies of an already emotionally raw public. They will get no sympathy from me!

but then again, what would, jeffk?
posted by lescour at 11:36 AM on September 13, 2001

If you ask me, it wasn't racial bias but shock on the part of the news organizations.

But in the aftermath it would be nice for them to recognize that it was a small group of people, and that they are emotionally scarred.

Overall it's such a small issue in the scheme of things, we should probably just drop it (both sides) and find the people who DID this.
posted by eric anders at 11:38 AM on September 13, 2001

all the trolling that's been going on these past few days is making me pretty sick.
posted by moz at 11:40 AM on September 13, 2001

who cares where the link comes from?
Racism, scapegoating, ignorance and violence are the same if it were to be reported on CNN.
People need to have better outlets for their emotions.
Our leaders need to be much more forceful on emphasizing respect for all citizens and residents of this country, regardless of their origin.
While it is sad and outrageous that these few people in foreign lands react this way, it is even more sad that fellow citizens have to act like animals in return. When we lose our civility and our respect for our neighbors, terror wins.
posted by themikeb at 11:40 AM on September 13, 2001

Bullshit. Video footage, by definition, cannot be "racially biased." It is what it is. Interpretations of the footage may be subject to bias, but there's no point in trying to pretend we didn't see what we saw.
posted by pardonyou? at 11:44 AM on September 13, 2001

Don't condescend or patronize those Palestinians dancing in the streets. The very young children possibly, possibly maybe might not understand what evil is, but all the adults do. They know right from wrong, they know the Koran forbids murder of innocent people. What are we supposed to do? give people of color a pass on morality because they've had oppressed lives, because they're poor or victims of violence? No. Never. Two wrongs don't make a right, something uttered by all mothers in all cultures all over the world, uttered by your own mother.

Here's a link to an article in that explains why war requires warlike actions upon anyone supporting such an evil cause as attacks on innocent people — http://www.nationalreview.com/01oct01/war_pryce-jones100101.shtml
posted by verus at 11:45 AM on September 13, 2001

Some facts. The shots were real And there were many in the streets, including many children. And then there were also pics of chhering in Cairo. And then Arafat issued a threat to any camerapeople taking shots of cheering Palestinians that they would have film taken away.
Now, I don't accuse all Palestinians of cheering the tragedy, but one more fact: at www.arabia.com, a poll taken had over 2000 voters. The largest number said Israel was behind the terror acts in America. On the other hand, other arab sources claimed the attacks were in response to Israel's support from America.
It is simplistic to blame all Palestinians of be cheerful But to deny that many were shooting guns and ha ding out candy simply flies in the face of pictures taken on the spot.
posted by Postroad at 11:45 AM on September 13, 2001

all the trolling that's been going on these past few days is making me pretty sick.

Wow you don't get out much in cyberville, huh? MeFi has been about the most level headed place on the internet, as far as I can tell.
posted by glenwood at 11:50 AM on September 13, 2001

PROTECT YOUR FELLOW AMERICANS OF COLOR

No. Protect the individual rights of all individuals, full stop.
posted by dagny at 11:50 AM on September 13, 2001

I read the article. Its a sad attempt by the palestinian propagandists to say something--anything, now that the game has changed so quickly and decisively against their favor--and the change came by way of their own tactics.

The reason Arafat rushed to offer his lip quivering condolences on Tuesday was simply because he knew in a flash when the buildings came down that it was a propaganda disaster for his "cause".

Notice how the suicide bombings in Israel have stopped? Before 911, the Palestinians would attack, the Israelis would retaliate the Palestinians would then garner simpathy on the world stage as they cried that the Israelis used overkill as payback.

Who in the world will shed a tear for Palestinians recieving payback today?

Somewhere in the Middle East, a high level intelligence operative for a terror sponsoring state is ripping his Hamas/Islamic Jihad/Al Queda rep a new asshole for totally going over the top and completely throwing the game. Both sides know this was a strategic blunder of massive proportions.

And there isn't a Country outside of the middle east to run to. Every nation, EVEN CHINA, knows that this could happen to them.

The Russians have been fighting off Islamic extremists infiltrating and gaining influence in all the 'Stans and Chechnia, so they'll be happy to see 'em get stomped as well.

My point is, this is a bad week to be an islamic extremist. There's no one to run to, and even the ignorant Taliban gov't is back peddling furiously.

If Bush fails to punish all the sponsoring states collectively, it will be as big a wimp-out as his dad pulling out of Iraq 3 days too soon...
posted by BentPenguin at 11:53 AM on September 13, 2001

African Americans looting in L.A. in 1992, calling them hoodlums and vandals

Wait, WEREN'T they?! Did the 'context' make it ok or make them any less hoodlums?

This is akin to the fellow who was uncomfortable with the fact that we keep calling terrorists of arabian descent "Arab Terrorists". Racism is racism, kids. If you want to tiptoe around the fact that even *gasp* non-white people in this world do horrible, horrible things then you're as racist as the best of them.
posted by glenwood at 11:53 AM on September 13, 2001

Give me a break! Did you consider the source? The "Electronic Intifada"!? It's just another example of towel-headed spin doctors trying to play on the sympathies of an already emotionally raw public. They will get no sympathy from me!

My my. The gutless punk trolls certainly have been active the last few days. Come on JeffK, at least leave a freeware email address or a link to a porn site. Pathetic.
posted by estopped at 11:55 AM on September 13, 2001

Here are various images of Palestinians paying their respects or helping out..
posted by valerie at 11:55 AM on September 13, 2001

glenwood: moz is right. We shouldn't lower our standards just because everybody else on the internet is worse.

JeffK: Metafilter is not like other places on the internet. Your comment was not appropriate here.
posted by gd779 at 11:56 AM on September 13, 2001

Bullshit. Video footage, by definition, cannot be "racially biased." It is what it is. Interpretations of the footage may be subject to bias, but there's no point in trying to pretend we didn't see what we saw.

Video footage may not be biased, but a news outlet's choice of displaying it over, and over, and over certainly could be. To burn images like that into people's heads is to illicit a response. "All ___ people are evil because the only ____ people I see are doing horrible things."

I'm surprised people don't see their emotions are being used against them with these images.
posted by mathowie at 11:56 AM on September 13, 2001

Thanks for the link Val.
posted by estopped at 11:58 AM on September 13, 2001

I'm surprised people don't see their emotions are being used against them with these images.

The news keep our eyes glued to their outlets with trainwrecks, plain and simple. I think you give the medias-that-be way too much credit when you assume a conspiracy of this magnitude.

My emotions? As we near the end of day 3, I've hardly got anything left to use.

Can I sleep now?
posted by glenwood at 11:59 AM on September 13, 2001

Bullshit. Video footage, by definition, cannot be "racially biased." It is what it is. Interpretations of the footage may be subject to bias, but there's no point in trying to pretend we didn't see what we saw.

That smacks of "Well, I saw it on TV, so it must be true," which, I'm sure we'd all agree is a ludicrous statement.

Matt is on the right track in his response, but it goes beyond just playing it over and over: in fact, anything you see on TV or read, hear or see in any other news media is the product of individual humans and their own particular thoughts, experiences, biases, opinions, etc. A human or humans choose which footage to show you, which part of the footage to play, which context to provide for it, how often to play it, what commentary to run with it, etc.

If you were standing on that street and saw this incident with your own eyes, understood the language being spoken, a fair amount about the world view of the people taking part, then I might begin to buy "Well, I saw it with my own two eyes", but even then, your understanding of any experience is predicated upon your own experiences, beliefs, knowledge, etc. And if you're relating your experience to me (which, in essence is what news media try to do), then it's still filtered through your interpretation.

To wit, there is no objectivity.
posted by tippiedog at 12:13 PM on September 13, 2001

Bullshit. Video footage, by definition, cannot be "racially biased." It is what it is. Interpretations of the footage may be subject to bias, but there's no point in trying to pretend we didn't see what we saw.

That reminds me of a story a professor told me about a 60's era peace protest at the University of Oklahoma. There were only about 100 people there, but the news folks set up their cameras in such a manner as to suggest a much, much bigger protest. Of course, the local nightly news broadcasts used this footage to make it seem like there was a mass of dirty unruly hippies invading OU when nothing could be further from the truth.

My point is that while video footage may be "true" as far as it goes, you need to know the video's context to truly understand what happened. Just ask any trial lawyer who uses videos in court.
posted by estopped at 12:25 PM on September 13, 2001

marknau--you certainly need some fucking context in relation to the article i posted. it's not talking about the attack. it's talking about the footage of palestinian "celebrations" the networks have been broadcasting too frequently.

when tragedy occurs, the first thing that must be opened is the mind. good to see that you're doing that, superstar.
posted by prozaction at 12:46 PM on September 13, 2001

moreover, everyone, yes, i am aware of the dubious source of this information. but, part of my point is: do you really think that -ANYONE- in the major news media other than, maybe, the bbc, would ever say anything in defense of the palestinians? especially when the US media's first knee-jerk reaction is to blame them?

i'm not putting this forth as credible evidence, but i certainly want to remind people that palestinians and muslims were guilty before proven innocent, and, more importantly, that THEY ARE NOT THE TERORRISTS.

as for this distress over my "PROTECT YOUR FELLOW AMERICANS OF COLOR" comment, let's please stop getting on our 'colorblind' soapboxes. you people know as well as i do that this is no time for blanket ideologies, and that specific communities must be defended. stop fighting for the ideological high ground. these are practical times and they call for practical warnings.
posted by prozaction at 12:54 PM on September 13, 2001

I just received an e-mail from a friend in Brazil that says:

"THOSE IMAGES WERE SHOT BACK IN 1991!!! Those are images of Palestinians celebrating the invasion of Kuwait! It's simply unacceptable that a super-power of comminications as CNN uses images which do not correspond to the reality in talking about so serious an
issue.

A teacher of mine, here in Brazil, has videotapes recorded in 1991, with the very same images; he's been sending emails to CNN, Globo (the major TV network in Brazil) and newspapers, denouncing what I myself classify as a crime against the public opinion. If anyone of you has access to
this kind of files, serch for it. In the meanwhile, I'll try to 'put myhands' on a copy of this tape."

I'm not saying it's true but there is place for a doubt
posted by papalotl at 1:07 PM on September 13, 2001

To wit, there is no objectivity.

And yet, the presumption must be that justice can be constructed from building blocks of bias.
posted by rushmc at 1:33 PM on September 13, 2001

papalotl: indymedia. It's clearly unfounded and biased.
posted by mkn at 1:39 PM on September 13, 2001

Papa, if you read the article it says that any reporter can basically get the same images by pointing a camera in the face of a group of Palestinians.

It doesn't really matter if it was shot today, or not. The fact is that SOME Palestinians were happy that Americans died. Whether that number is 100, 1,000, 10,000 we don't know. But somehow those people have become like that.

Having said that, I still don't think its really relevant right now. It definitely didn't deserve the coverage it got.
posted by eric anders at 1:47 PM on September 13, 2001

It doesn't really matter if it was shot today, or not.

If it was represented, directly or by implication, that it was shot today, then it matters. If it was clear to the viewer that it was merely a visual aid to make a point, then it may not be relevant. Context is everything.
posted by rushmc at 2:23 PM on September 13, 2001

prozaction sez:
marknau--you certainly need some fucking context in relation to the article i posted.

The article says:
A comparable situation would be [...] failing to note the preceding attack on Rodney King or endemic racial profiling of the black community in the U.S. by police forces.

and:
there is an all-important context of brutalisation

The argument that the media should not show biased images that present a dangerously partial picture of reality is a good one, but this article wants us to forgive evil because of the context of the perpitrators lives.

I think I made my objection clear, and even managed to use civil language.
posted by marknau at 3:05 PM on September 13, 2001

What is so wrong about some Palestinians being happy about what happened? Americans all across the country were happy when we attacked Iraq, etc.

What a bunch of hypocrites. Don't you realize that some people are not happy with the US? Various celebrations have zero impact on what's going on in NY right now. They'll have zero impact on our resulting attack.

You people need to lighten up. Don't be so touchy.
posted by delmoi at 3:06 PM on September 13, 2001

Adding my (yourfavouritecurrency)0.01 to discussion..

Please let's try to use our brain as often as possible, it's our only tool , the only useful one. Using your mouth to
say whatever crosses your mind may be dangerous. Always think TWICE before writing too.

I think it is horrible , some people is blaming somebody else for a vicious act that was done by TERRORIST. The only thing that matters to me is that they were TERRORIST.

Terrorist race, skin color, political and religious beliefs are simply irrilevant. They're terrorist , period.

Imagine the relatives and parents of the victims : do you think that they care about the color of skin, the race, the religion of whoever killed their loved ones ? I guess all they want is to KILL whoever gave terrorist the resources to do that.

Don't let the media confusion obfuscate your brain. The only thing that matters now is to remain unite against any kind of terrorism. United in the WORLD, not only in USA.

Americans are under shock and I understand their confusion ; it's normal after an event of such catastrophic proportion. I trust that the good people of America will recover from that shock and reason more about how TRAGIC is to have somebody taken away from you because of EXTREMISMS ; it may be political, religion or economy extremisms, extremism nurtures terrorist of many kinds.

Please don't let terrorism do what terrorism does best: divide people, incite violence, destroy years-worth of diplomacy in a few seconds.
posted by elpapacito at 3:13 PM on September 13, 2001

Perhaps the footage was biased, I personally don't agree since I didn't see the celebrating children broadcast very much. I've read/seen far more reporting about support/condemnation of the attacks from every racial angle rather than those supporting it.

The gist of this post though is in reference to that indymedia article: why exactly would the cameraman be threated about the release of the footage? By the sounds of it, there's a lot more that we aren't seeing. Anyone else heard about this before? Doesn't seem to me that the media is playing it up.
posted by yupislyr at 6:41 PM on September 13, 2001

Support/condemnation AGAINST the attacks, I mean. Bah. You know what I mean.
posted by yupislyr at 6:43 PM on September 13, 2001

sorry about the language, marknau. emotions get flared up over these things, and i agree with you.
posted by prozaction at 7:34 PM on September 13, 2001

I don't have a problem with showing current footage of celebrating Palestinians as long as it's presented in context. If it's only indicative of a small group of people when many more are responding with sorrow, it's unfair to emphasize the fringe elements. The media could probably find militia members in the U.S. who cheered this on.
posted by rcade at 7:59 PM on September 13, 2001