The flotilla affair should surely be studied by journalism students for years to come.  A ship with 60 journalists aboard (according to Reporters without Borders), and a huge amount of camera and communications equipment gets hijacked by a hostile power that jams all communications signals, confiscates all equipment, cuffs the journalists, and keeps them under nasty conditions for the hours and days that follow.  It spreads its own version of what happened, based on doctored video and audio footage, then adds additional footage from the equipment stolen from the journalists. The journalists and other eye witnesses are not permitted to speak until leaving the country, and apparently the journalists are held longer than the activists.

Afterwards, the IDF even produce a clearly fabricated version of the initial dialogue with the Mavi Marmara (this is even different from the first version released by the IDF to Israeli Channel 10 news).  See later confirmation of this here.

It appears that, as in earlier events, like the Gaza War, disinformation was used, then retracted.  This tactic is effective in order to confuse critics in the early hours or days when the story is still “hot.”

Despite everything, almost all Israelis and most journals around the world accept the Israeli version that the first actions of the activists were violent, based on a small amount of film material shot by the Israelis.

Indeed, the segment of film released by the IDF appears to be uncontrovertible.  However we are denied context.  It does not establish whether or not the army began to use live ammunition from the beginning of the assault (as the activists say), or whether, for instance, the activists felt justified in putting up a struggle since they believed they were going to die anyway.

The accounts of the raid by journalists and eye witnesses appear to differ from that of the IDF, and the ones I have heard seem to have more in common with each other than the Israeli version. I wonder how, if an investigation of the affair is conducted, this will be handled?

Pro-Palestinian groups around the world are ebullient. Finally they’re in the spotlight and are keeping up a ceaseless banter on Twitter and the networks. The martyrdom of a few shahids at the brutal hands of the Israeli military seems to have been worth it for this moment of glory.

Curiously, for once (with the exception of Raed Salah and Hanin Zoubi) there are no Palestinians in this story: only internationals and Turks. The world, which has consistently betrayed Palestine and left it to be ruled over and subjugated by Israel, is suddenly in the forefront, with a tale of nobility, heroism and personal sacrifice on the high seas. A Hollywood movie.

The Palestinians are somewhere in the background. Their lives continue under occupation. Breaking through a blockade, with a few tons of food, medical supplies and cement is not going to be enough. Even defeating the policy of siege is not going to be enough. Palestinians need to get back control over their lives, a state of their own, or a sharing of power all over Palestine.

The news tonight brought more stories of Israel’s public relations debacle around the flotilla incident.  Foreign reporters gathered on what’s known as Jonah’s Hill in Jaffa, where they were left alone with a rowdy bunch of right-wing hecklers.

Hours later, the government press office people appear on the scene but have not been provided with any real details to feed the media. To compensate, they transport the journalists in a bus with covered windows to a secret base. There they can film the backside of a commando who speaks for 57 seconds and is not permitted to respond to questions.  Eventually, the weary journalists are brought back into the arms of the right-wing hecklers, who now turn violent and chase everyone away.

The TV news program anchors suggest that instead of blaming Israel’s official propaganda machine, Israelis should tear themselves away from the TV screens, go on the network, and fight the public relations war themselves.

Another news item brings the story of the Turkish aid organization’s links with Islamic terror organizations. It turns out that those killed were not innocent peace activists but bloodthirsty terrorists or perhaps mercenaries working for Al Qaida:

“They were terrorists – hired killers who came to murder soldiers, not to assist the residents of the Gaza Strip,” said a navy officer.”

Whatever justification can be made for this botched and tragic incident, only Israelis will believe it or care. Jamming broadcasts, isolating the activists from all contact with the world for 24 hours, confiscating film media and presented only selective material that supports Israel’s version has not helped.  The world has accepted a one-dimensional narrative of Israel’s brutal aggression and moved on.

Finally, the only story that matters is the ongoing siege of Gaza and when it is going to end.  Will we allow ourselves once again to forget?

I read a number of articles today about the flotilla, in a desultory sort of way – generally agreeing with all of them, from Gideon Levi’s editorial to the Guardian editorial, Robert Fisk and the blogs. I listened to Al Jazeera, heard MK Haneen Zoubi‘s press conference and watched the Israeli Channel 10 TV news. Channel 10 is often a bit less biased than the others, but they managed very well to keep up the Israeli side of the story, spreading a new rumor that the Turks who attacked the soldiers were possibly Al-Qaida operatives. They poked fun at the 25 trucks full of humanitarian aid, that was already on its way from the Ashdod port for Gaza as just a quarter of what the army allows through every day, without questioning what may have been in the containers (items such as expensive electric wheel chairs have been mentioned elsewhere). It was also curious that Egypt’s opening of its border with Gaza now, “for an unlimited period” received only a casual mention, whereas this is no doubt something significant. Why at least that border could not be opened before, and why tunnels became necessary even for transporting trivial items, has continued to puzzle me.

The Jerusalem Post also has few words of criticism, other than the manner in which the event was handled from a public relations perspective. They complained that the Israeli navy’s photos came in just in time for the local TV news, but too late to convince the world media. I would agree that Israel manages to convince its people of its version of events much more effectively than it manages to convince anyone else. This creates a dangerous gap between the unique way that Israelis see their situation and the way almost everyone else in the world sees it.  Both of these perspectives may be a little one-dimensional.  But the gap between them is growing wider.*

Finally tonight we have some hard facts and numbers regarding the activists and the number of those killed. This came about because, mercifully, Israel decided to back down and deport them all immediately.

Later:

* Patrick Cockburn in The Independent (June 2) say the same in PR dangerously distorts the Israeli sense of reality “The problem is that nobody believes Israeli propaganda as much as Israelis. Pro-Palestinian activists often lament the fluency and mendacity of Israeli spokesmen on the airwaves and the pervasive influence of Israel’s supporters abroad. But, in reality, these PR campaigns are Israel’s greatest weakness, because they distort Israelis’ sense of reality. Defeats and failures are portrayed as victories and successes.”

* See also the interview by Mario Vargas Llosa of Haaretz journalist Gideon Levy:  “The media in Israel, most of them, are the biggest collaborators to the occupation. There is no censorship in Israel, almost none. There is something that is much worse than censorship, self-censorship, because in self-censorship there is never resistance. Were it government censorship, there would be resistance, but this is self-censorship. This is a tyranny of ratings, the tyranny of those who want to please the readers, the tyranny of selling newspapers and not bothering the readers with things they don’t want to read.”

In the same newspaper, Levy’s statements are backed up Amos Schocken: Haaretz publisher: Self-censorship is greatest threat to press freedom: Amos Schocken tells conference sponsored by the French Embassy in Israel in cooperation with Haaretz that many journalists are concerned about alienating their readers.
I’m not sure that it is simply deliberate self-censorship or willful manipulation.  It is at least partly an unconscious self-participation in mass illusion on the part of the journalist.  People, including journalists, basically see what we want to see and hear what we are open to hearing.  Thus, Haaretz writer Liad Shoham heard a different version of MK Hanin Zoubi’s press conference than the one I heard.