[*] Voir, par exemple, l’article d’Alex Brummer : "Al-Dura: You can’t always believe what you see". 

Tue. Nov 27, 2007

The Chronicle Herald (Canada)

French TV network France 2 reporter Charles Enderlin reacts as he leaves a Paris courthouse following a hearing on Nov. 14.

France 2 has been accused of manipulating footage to make Israel look responsible for the September 2000 shooting death of a 12-year-old Palestinian boy. (MICHEL EULER / AP)

YOU’VE heard of Hollywood and Bollywood. How about Pallywood?

Probably not. Then again, unlike the first two, which are established centres of commercial film production, Pallywood’s existence is highly controversial. The term Pallywood mockingly refers to allegations that an "industry" exists to create news stories, and particularly visual images, that show Palestinians being victimized by Israeli brutality. In other words, the accusation is that Palestinians sometimes fake the news to make the Israelis look bad and gain sympathy for their cause.

Allegations that Western media organizations, at times, distribute news reports, photos and film that inacccurately depict events are certainly nothing new. News, to para-phrase an old saying, is but a first draft of history. As such, it can often be incomplete and misleading. Information that leads to one conclusion one day can, as more details emerge, lead in the opposite direction the next. As journalists should know, those hoping to manipulate perceptions try to take advantage of the news cycle’s fluidity and constant demand for material to plant convincing inaccuracies, especially early on, when the biggest headlines are generated.

All sides in conflicts try to spin. But how far they’ll go, and what checks and balances are set in place to remove or reduce that spin, can vary.

Which brings us to a fascinating defamation trial now on in France, where the key question concerns the truthfulness of perhaps THE iconic image of the second intefadeh: This is of the incident in which 12-year-old Mohammed al-Dura, hiding with his father behind a barrel in the face of apparently withering Israeli fire at a Gaza intersection, is reportedly killed, his body slumped over his father’s knees as the man sits dazed against a cement wall.

Now, I don’t claim to know the truth of what happened that day in September 2000. I do know, however, that many unanswered questions remain about what the raw footage of that scene reveals and why some of the original film was not surrendered to the court by the French network France 2, despite a judge’s instructions. Deeper questions also linger, most pertinently whether a system whereby Palestinian stringers, often working alone, provide content for Western news organizations – covering a Palestinian-Israeli conflict they supposedly can remain objective about – is not exceedingly vulnerable to abuse.

Here are the base facts of the case. Cameraman Talal Abu Rahma, a Palestinian working for France 2, captured what was described as a firefight between Israeli soldiers and Palestinian militants at a Gaza intersection near an Israeli security base. Many Palestinian youths, some throwing rocks, were also filmed. Rahma says he sent all 27 minutes of footage he shot to the network. The well-known France 2 journalist Charles Enderlin, who was in the West Bank at the time, produced a report using 55 seconds of that footage, focusing on the dramatic scenes of the cowering boy and his screaming father behind a barrel, and then the shocking aftermath which ignited anti-Israeli protests around the world and, many say, inflamed Palestinian rage during the second intefadeh.

Philippe Karsenty, a French media critic, had doubts about the report’s authenticity. After investigating, he claimed the shooting was a hoax. Enderlin and France 2 sued Karsenty for defamation. Amazingly, France 2 was not required by the court to submit the entire 27 minutes of raw footage, which Karsenty argued would reveal many of the scenes were staged. Karsenty lost and was ordered to pay damages. He appealed; that case is now before the courts. The appeal court ordered France 2 to release all 27 minutes of footage, but the network provided only 18 – clearly edited – arguing the rest was irrelevant. The case is now recessed until February.

What did the film show? According to a number of observers, there appears to be no incontrovertible evidence that Israelis shot the boy. The bullet holes and puffs of smoke on the wall behind the father and son indicate fire coming from a different direction than the Israeli base. The boy, allegedly shot in the stomach and dying or dead, is covering his eyes, with no signs of blood on the ground where he lies. For a few seconds, the boy can even be seen lifting his hand to look around. Other parts of the film raise other questions about the authenticity of the scene. There are many websites on the controversy. If you’re interested, do a Google or YouTube search on "al-Dura."

As the court attempts to unravel this mystery, it’s fair to also recall this is not the first accusation of a news event being a Pallywood production. The al-Dura case may be as France 2 insists. But we’ve seen cases where the bodies of Palestinian martyrs carried on stretchers are inadvertently dropped, then, of their own volition, climb back on again. We’ve seen reports of massacres, as in Jenin in 2002, that turned out, after independent investigation, to have been greatly exaggerated. Needless to say, such episodes don’t instil an abiding trust in subsequent Palestinian claims, at least until they’re verified.

To be clear, I’m not saying that Palestinian stringers or journalists should not cover Palestinian stories. But there undoubtedly exists a troubling impression that a potential, and potent, conflict of interest could be in play with at least some Palestinian journalists who are covering events that directly, and powerfully, affect their families and friends. Given all that, Western media outlets should not be surprised at criticism that some of what they report may be inaccurate. Moreover, it is up to those same news organizations to expend enough resources to ensure they get it right.

© The Chronicle Herald

* City Editor of the Daily Mail.