New York Times Editor Bill Keller, in defending his decision to retain Bronner as their bureau chief despite Bronner's conflict of interest and profoundly flawed track record, writes that he feels Bronner's intimate family ties with Israel "supply a measure of sophistication about Israel and its adversaries."

If the Times actually does want full, unbiased reporting on this region (there is little to indicate this, but let's imagine it is so), it is essential that the Times also have bureaus in the Palestinian Territories; ideally, one in the West Bank and one in Gaza, headed by people with equal "sophistication" about Palestine and its adversaries.

Fortunately for the Times, a journalist with an excellent track record for journalism in the area and, no doubt, considerable "sophistication," is now available. Jared Malsin, a Jewish-American 2007 Yale graduate, was until recently the chief English editor at Ma'an News, the largest independent news organization in the West Bank and an excellent source of news.

Apparently because of this, Malsin was recently denied re-entry by Israel, incarcerated for about a week, and deported by Israeli authorities.

I suggest that the Times now explore hiring Malsin or someone else with equivalent knowledge and skills to head up a West Bank bureau. While I realize that some in the Israeli government might attempt to prevent Malsin from assuming this post, I expect that the Times, unlike Ma'an, has the connections and the clout to overcome an Israeli attempt to censor their hirees. If Israel attempted to do this, I would hope the Times would consider it front-page news, and that the editorial page would comment on it, as well.

If Malsin has already taken a position elsewhere, I suspect that he could recommend other informed and skilled individuals for this position. I would be delighted to assist the Times in such a search and would be happy to suggest numerous people who could direct them to excellent candidates for such a position.

Others may wish to suggest this to Mr. Keller as well. After all, the Times ethics guidelines state: "In keeping with its solemn responsibilities under the First Amendment, our company strives to maintain the highest standard of journalistic ethics" and maintains, "our goal is to cover the news impartially."

How better to fulfill their solemn responsibility to report the news impartially than to have bureaus in both Israel AND in Palestine, staffed with people either with no close connections to either society, or by people with equally deep connections to both?

(Of course, Malsin, as far as I'm aware, has no familial connections to Palestinian society and much more fits into the first category; in that respect, he doesn't even come close to balancing Bronner. I am suggesting Malsin because of his track record at Ma'an; however, there are Palestinians and Palestinian-Americans who would also be excellent, perhaps even superior choices. My main point is to begin the discussion.)

In the meantime, until the Times follows its own ethics guidelines, I suggest that people who wish to be well-informed on Israel-Palestine turn to Ma'an News, the International Middle East Media Center (less well-funded than Ma'an but also an excellent source of information), and our own news blog. A valuable monthly resource is the Washington Report on Middle East Affairs.

As the Times rarely tells readers, Americans are major funders of Israel. We'd better know how it's using our money.

#

Mr Keller can be reached at

executive-editor@nytimes.com
212.556.1234

*

FYI: A new discussion of Bronner by Lysandra Ohrstrom at Huffington is well worth reading

Editor Bill Keller explains in a blog posting that the Times' "rulebook leaves us wide latitude," that they're not going "to capitulate to the more savage partisans," and that they're not even going to listen to their own ombudsman, Readers Representative Clark Hoyt, who, in a column to be published in tomorrow's paper, recommends moving Bronner:

But, stepping back [Clark writes], this is what I see: The Times sent a reporter overseas to provide disinterested coverage of one of the world’s most intense and potentially explosive conflicts, and now his son has taken up arms for one side. Even the most sympathetic reader could reasonably wonder how that would affect the father, especially if shooting broke out.

...this is not about punishment; it is simply a difficult reality. I would find a plum assignment for him somewhere else, at least for the duration of his son’s service in the I.D.F.

Keller claims, referring to Hoyt's column, "...everyone you interviewed for your column concurs that Ethan Bronner is fully capable of continuing to cover his beat fairly."

Actually, Hoyt, who perhaps due to lack of personal expertise in the region praises Bronner's "excellent track record," references only three interviews with people concerning Bronner's work (other than with Keller himself): one was quoted significantly out of context and the other two were former Times' journalists.

Keller neglects to mention that in his column Clark writes that he had heard from 400 readers, "...many of them convinced that Bronner could not continue in his current assignment," and who, quite likely, would have given a substantially different assessment of Bronner's work if Clark had bothered to interview them.

Interestingly, Clark reports that Bronner had told him that his son "joined in late December for roughly a year of training and six months of active duty before he returns to the United States for college." Normally, Israeli soldiers are required to serve in the Israeli reserves for decades. Did Bronner fail to inform Mr. Clark of this fact? Or did Mr. Clark choose not to inform readers of it?

Not surprisingly, the Times again chooses to ignore our studies demonstrating the Times' distortion on this issue. Similarly, there is no mention of the excellent book "Israel-Palestine on Record: How the New York Times Misreports Conflict in the Middle East," co-authored by distinguished Princeton Emeritus Professor Richard Falk detailing the Times' flawed coverage.

Apparently, Mr. Keller is unconcerned that skewed Times' coverage enables tragic and profoundly destructive US policies, destroying thousands of lives. Unlike Mr. Keller, some of us care. I wonder if we're the "savage partisans" to whom he refers.

Clark writes, "Nobody at The Times wants to give in to what they see as relentlessly unfair criticism of the paper’s Middle East coverage by people hostile to objective reporting."

While it's true that Bronner himself talks of "narratives," and Israel partisans oppose objective reporting,  I personally have been pleading for it for many years. The Times, sadly, seems to have little interest in giving it to us on Israel-Palestine.

CNN news report on this - "Traffickers targeting Haiti's children, human organs, PM says"

(CNN) -- Trafficking of children and human organs is occurring in the aftermath of the earthquake that devastated parts of Haiti, killed more than 150,000 people, and left many children orphans, Haitian Prime Minister Jean-Max Bellerive said Wednesday.

"There is organ trafficking for children and other persons also, because they need all types of organs," Bellerive said in an exclusive interview with CNN's Christiane Amanpour....