NZ's broadcaster defends its decision to not broadcast a Palestinian guest's remarks, but UN Rapporteur Francesca Albanese warns the term should be used frequently.
Someone had to cover this issue in depth, and Mick Hall has done that for us. First off, it is helpful (though not strictly necessary) in this context to make the case that the State of Israel has been committing genocide in Gaza. Mick had to show a strategic intent to destroy a people by reporting Israeli statements ("Israeli President Isaac Herzog said “an entire nation” was responsible for the Hamas attack... the military goal in Gaza was destruction not accuracy... sinister comments made by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu... leaked Israel ‘concept’ document revealed a plan to displace Gazans " etc) and then he had to show actions which corresponded to that intent "over 20,000 tonnes of explosives have landed on Gaza, leaving half of all buildings destroyed, agricultural land, bakeries and hospitals bombed, and 14,000 dead, including over 6000 children. An estimated 1.7 million people have been displaced, with residents forced from the north to the south of Gaza, while it too is being bombed" etc.
The charge of genocide is not one to be made lightly, and Mick's article was as brief as it could be while making a credible case for the idea that what is happening in Gaza may indeed be genocide.
Now to RNZ. If Israel did not have a case to answer on the charge of genocide, RNZ arguably might have been within its rights to censor the claim. That would have been inconsistent, of course, because it chose to broadcast totally unsubstantiated claims by Ben Kepes. But the inescapable conclusion is that RNZ censored Shaltoni's comments not because they were false, but because they are true.
The consolation in all this is that even though New Zealanders depend on local and western media for most of their news about world affairs and Palestine in particular, and despite the worst efforts of RNZ, a majority are able to see clearly that an attempt at genocide is under way in Gaza. RNZ can censor opinions but when it tries to restrict access to the facts it faces a dilemma. The facts will eventually come to light through other sources, including "Mick Hall in Context", and the public credibility of traditional news sources such as RNZ will be even more rapidly eroded. Neither genocide nor misinformation are viable long term strategies.
In choosing to take the side of genocide, RNZ and the colonialist regime generally have chosen to take the losing side in history.
Well Mick, how's the form? Sorry to hear about your troubles with the job.
Excellent stuff, could be a little tighter? I’m afraid our attention span is shrinking rapidly 🥹
Someone had to cover this issue in depth, and Mick Hall has done that for us. First off, it is helpful (though not strictly necessary) in this context to make the case that the State of Israel has been committing genocide in Gaza. Mick had to show a strategic intent to destroy a people by reporting Israeli statements ("Israeli President Isaac Herzog said “an entire nation” was responsible for the Hamas attack... the military goal in Gaza was destruction not accuracy... sinister comments made by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu... leaked Israel ‘concept’ document revealed a plan to displace Gazans " etc) and then he had to show actions which corresponded to that intent "over 20,000 tonnes of explosives have landed on Gaza, leaving half of all buildings destroyed, agricultural land, bakeries and hospitals bombed, and 14,000 dead, including over 6000 children. An estimated 1.7 million people have been displaced, with residents forced from the north to the south of Gaza, while it too is being bombed" etc.
The charge of genocide is not one to be made lightly, and Mick's article was as brief as it could be while making a credible case for the idea that what is happening in Gaza may indeed be genocide.
Now to RNZ. If Israel did not have a case to answer on the charge of genocide, RNZ arguably might have been within its rights to censor the claim. That would have been inconsistent, of course, because it chose to broadcast totally unsubstantiated claims by Ben Kepes. But the inescapable conclusion is that RNZ censored Shaltoni's comments not because they were false, but because they are true.
The consolation in all this is that even though New Zealanders depend on local and western media for most of their news about world affairs and Palestine in particular, and despite the worst efforts of RNZ, a majority are able to see clearly that an attempt at genocide is under way in Gaza. RNZ can censor opinions but when it tries to restrict access to the facts it faces a dilemma. The facts will eventually come to light through other sources, including "Mick Hall in Context", and the public credibility of traditional news sources such as RNZ will be even more rapidly eroded. Neither genocide nor misinformation are viable long term strategies.
In choosing to take the side of genocide, RNZ and the colonialist regime generally have chosen to take the losing side in history.