There is a problem with how Israel’s retaliation for the Houthi drone attack on Tel Aviv is being covered. In...
The post Media Twisted Israeli Retaliatory Strike on Houthi Targets, Calling It an ‘Attack’ first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
Hodeidah, Yemen, July 20, 2024. Houthi Military Media/Handout via REUTERS
There is a problem with how Israel’s retaliation for the Houthi drone attack on Tel Aviv is being covered. In fact, it’s eerily similar to how reports on Gaza are covered — by legitimizing a terror group and leaving out important context.
Some publications, like the unashamed UPI, chose to headline their Sunday article by describing Israel’s retaliatory strike on a Houthi military target in the city of Hodeidah (which is used to smuggle Iranian weapons) as an “attack.”
This wasn’t a random attack, obviously, but a response to terrorism directed at Israel.
The deliberate short-term memory of @upi ignores: the Houthis attacked Tel Aviv, killing an Israeli civilian & wounding several others. Israel’s response on a Yemeni port — where Houthis receive & store weapons from Iran — was exactly that, A RESPONSE. pic.twitter.com/sDBqgUsY7L
— HonestReporting (@HonestReporting) July 22, 2024
UPI reporter Adam Schrader’s article covers a plethora of Houthi responses and propaganda such as this:
Yemen’s official Ministry of Public Health and Population condemned Israeli aggression against Yemen that targeted civilian facilities in Hodeidah.
Why did he fail to include information on more than 220 missiles and drones that the Houthis have attempted to blast Israel’s way over the last nine months? Or what about the blocking and pirating of cargo ships in the peninsula? How about the UK and US strikes on the Houthis over the last several months?
Or what about the latest and most obvious piece of information to include: that the Houthis struck a civilian apartment building in central Tel Aviv, killed one person and injured 10 others? And that’s not to mention, giving context and clarity on Israel’s response, not random attack, on the Yemeni port infrastructure where Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu revealed that Houthis receive and store weapons from Iran.
No. None of that. Just the stroking of Houthi and Hamas ego.
Others, like the Associated Press, did lazy man-on-the-street reporting in Sanaa, Yemen, by interviewing only one person about their reaction to Israel’s strike on the Houthi-controlled port target, and then claiming Sanaa residents as a whole denounce the strike on the rebel group, which has brought the entire country anguish for years:
Note to AP: If you want a headline about “Sanaa residents” denouncing Israel, you have to find more than just this one guy: https://t.co/GizyABg5up
— HonestReporting (@HonestReporting) July 22, 2024
There was also ABC News’ choice of wording on a live broadcast on Sunday, where the anchor referred to the location of the strike as the general Arabian Peninsula.
This is potentially inflammatory terminology — saying Israel “targeted several Houthi targets in the Arabian peninsula,” rather than specifying the strike was on the port of Yemen.
While Yemen’s port is off the peninsula, this is an extremely vague term that can be interpreted by viewers as Israel striking anywhere and indiscriminately.
As the media continue to cover this new development between Israel and the Houthis in Yemen, they should keep the facts intact and not twist the story into a biased — and unfortunately — familiar narrative that Israel is a wild aggressor.
The author is a contributor to HonestReporting, a Jerusalem-based media watchdog with a focus on antisemitism and anti-Israel bias — where a version of this article first appeared.
The post Media Twisted Israeli Retaliatory Strike on Houthi Targets, Calling It an ‘Attack’ first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
