I asked last night for you to join the debate on Gaza here on Snowblog. You didn’t disappoint. We are still trawling through what you had to say overnight and some of your views are here. Meantime, here again is my interview with Israeli government spokesman, Mark Regev which followed Jonathan Miller’s report.
(All comments will be pre-moderated and our moderating hours are 8am to 9pm weekdays – Snowblog editor)
Commentsoldest first
This interview was testament to the arrogance of Israel with regards Gaza. Excellent work, Jon, keeping him to topic although it was clear you had to bail! C4 seem to be the only channel actively investigating Gaza. BBC seem too weak and ‘PC’.
I also would congratulate Jon Snow on this particular interview. However C4 and other British Media in general, while rightly deploring Israel’s attempt to stop what they consistently described, in a rather superior, classically ‘Orientalist’ way, as the ‘International’ and/or ‘Mainstream Media’ reporting from Gaza, have not paid sufficient recognition, in public anyway, to one international media organisation that did provide continuous English language reporting from within Gaza, and of a high standard. That organisation was Aljazeera, and I think the British media would do well to study and acknowledge what they did. They firstly gave the issue the prominence it deserved throughout the horrendous three weeks when. on many days the British media, particularly the BBC relegated it to the tail end of the news, or ignored it altogether. They also maintained, in my view, a high level of analysis from a wide range of viewpoints, including not just the Arab side which was noticeably underrepresented elsewhere, but also the Israeli, even the deplorable Regev, albeit consistently with a lot more of the objectivity and, when necessary, the justifiable anger you showed last night. I have not seen your Dispatches programme yet (not available on watch again yet!) and maybe you looked at this. I hope so.
Contrary to what you say, Nathan, Jon Snow (whom I had hitherto respected greatly as a journalist) badgered Mr Regev naively and belligerently without warrant.
I am no Zionist, and if Israel is guilty of atrocities appropriate international action should be taken. But the interview was clearly biased firmly in favour of Hamas, as many British media reports are. It was clear that Snow was out of line since he simply cut Mr Regev off when he saw that he (Snow) had overstepped the mark. I think Mr Regev deserves an apology. No Hamas leader would have been subjected to such a savage interview.
I was interested to see that Jonathan Millar’s latest report vindicates the allegation Mr Regev made that Hamas did use human shields, and were prepared to shoot their own citizens who refused to cooperate with their warmongering. Come on, Channel 4, admit that last night’s interview was out of line. It is the only honourable course of action to take.
oh look right after john snow attacked mark regev about saying that hamas is an authoritarian regime, the next day there were reports, from palestinians in gaza, about how hamas uses them as human shields and if they refuse hamas executes them! so who’s the bad gus?!
“Our moderating hours are 8am to 9pm weekdays – Snowblog editor” – a useful piece of information. Also, it looks a bit as if the blog postings might take basic pseudo-html but I can find no information on this. Certainly a URL vanished from a posting yesterday – presumably because it was sent inside angle brackets.
A truely remarkable piece of journalism from a man I have come to admire so much for his bravery and courage in confronting the truth and shying away from political correctness. With regard to Mr Regev, get in touch with reality for sake of humanity. For Israel, war crimes committed, there’s no doubt – what “evidence” will convince the Americans and Israelis. Excellent interview Mr Snow. I wish other, the so called impartial journalists like the BBC also had the courage to face the reality and not get in to political correctness and pressure from Zionists.
Sir,
I had come to respect Channel 4 News for their unbiased and even handed approach to reporting world events. I therefore would like to ask John Snow and his colleagues at Channel 4 News and the reporters in the Middle east where can I see the interviews they have conducted with Hamas, along the same lines as those they have pursued with representatives of the Israeli government. Perhaps I have missed the interviews that asked Hamas as to exactly what were they transporting in those many tunnels and getting to the bottom of whether or not they fired rockets from within their own community and what did they expect the consequences to be of their actions. They even had an Hamas representative on the Thursday evening report showing us that Israel had bombed a mosque, but did I see the reporter take the opportunity to ask this representative these sorts of questions. Or is the truth so obviously one-sided that I have missed entirely the point.
Yours
T. Malcolm Lakin
Thank you for exposing the Israeli lies and their propaganda machine . . .
I watched Jon Snow’s Dispatches last night about the reporting of the war against the Palestinians . . it was excellent . . thank you Jon Snow .. .
Hi Jon, just wanted to commend you on thatexcellent interview with Mark Regev last night. How dare he insinuate that Hamas was behind the phoshorus only to deny having said that under close questioning. As for his atitudes towards the quality of journalism. I heard him say the same thing on the ITN news with Julia Sommerville the previous night and heard Ed Stourton getting very frustrated in a similar way with a different Israeli spokesperson this morning on Today. At least Mark Regev is no longer having to draw on ‘our’ collective western liberal democratic tradition to justify the bombings which left me throwing things at the tv in recent weeks! Have yet to watch the dispatches special, will do so when am feeling suitably strong.
What can we as citizens do though? I am boycotting Israeli produce but my recent non-purchase of red peppers will hardly bring their economy to a halt!
Regards
Mark Regev says in the interview that it is a documented fact that Hamas has been firing phosphorus weapons into Israel. I’d be interested if there is a believable source who could verify this claim? Jon, who I believe to be well informed, wasn’t able to reply to this! Maybe this is because it is not very well documented at all and I wonder why this is!!!
Well done Channel 4 News and Jon Snow for being one of the few people in the MSM to investigate what is happening in Gaza. Jon your interview last night was excellent and the Israeli spokesman came across as an arrogant bully.
Please keep up the good work, I was deeply shocked the previous night when I saw your report about the way villages have been devastated by the Israeli army.
Maybe people will start realising that the Palestinians actually have a case!
Thanks again.
Good work Jon and excellent reporting by Jonathan Miller. Please keep on exposing the lies and brutality of the Isreali government. From last nights interview it is clear that Israel has a lot to hide.
Yes, kudos to Jonathan Miller in a dangerous situation.
The targeting of fishermen in Palestinian territorial waters is a disgrace as is the ramming and threatening of aid ships from Cyprus. I wonder has this anything to do with the large gas find off Gaza’s coast?
This whole war has strong similarities with the Iraq war. The media were managed there as well. And the outright denial from the Israeli ministers sounds similar.
As in that war Israel are making a rod for their own backs.
In addition, surely the Western countries should be putting pressure on Israel to honour the UN mandates that they have ignored?
Jon:
I saw the interview with Israeli government spokesman Mark Regev, very thoughtful interview and; thanks, for exposing some of the remarks…..
I greatly respect Jon Snow’s professionalism as a reporter and interviewer. In my view he has always dealt with Mr. Regev courteously but robustly, as is only proper. However I do feel that over recent weeks various spokespersons have been allowed to get away unchallenged with justifications for their actions which simply do not hold water. In particular two fallacies have been repeated so often that I feel compelled to draw attention to them.
[1] The “unintended consequences” fallacy.
Defenders of IDF actions repeatedly draw a moral distinction between Hamas’ actions which intend to kill civilians but thankfully in the majority of cases fail in this objective and IDF actions which in fact result in the death of many hundreds of innocent civilians but unintentionally. The impression is generated that Israel bears no legal or moral responsibility for these deaths because an agent cannot be held responsible for the unintended consequences of their actions. This is not true. If I were to drive under the influence of alcohol and accidentally kill someone then I would be fully responsible for that death both morally and in law even though causing death or injury was the furthest thought from my mind. Anyone who knowingly puts another person in harms way is fully responsible for any harm that ensues even if they do not intend that harm. When Israel fires ordinance into crowded civilian residential areas it may be able to argue that this course of action is the least evil of all the possible alternatives but it cannot argue that it is not responsible for all the consequences of such actions, intended or not.
[2] The “it’s not our fault it’s theirs” fallacy.
Israeli spokespersons regularly blame civilian deaths on Hamas’ using of civilians as human shields. The use of human shields is, of course, to be condemned utterly but the fact that terrorists might be exploiting even innocent children in such a despicable way does not give security forces the right to kill the children in order to get at the terrorists. Moral and legal responsibility for the deaths of the innocent civilians lies with those whose actions lead directly to their deaths whether or not (as argued above) they intend those deaths. This remains true even if the innocent civilians are functioning unwittingly as human shields
I first sent this last night but it appeared not to go through.
Excellent points very well made!
While I agree that it is appalling that innocents are being killed in the Israeli efforts to get at Hamas terrorists, the problem is that holding back has an equally bad effect – that of encouraging terrorists to use these tactics. It is not just in this conflict that the problem arises – it is internationally known as a terrorist tactic and can be seen functioning wherever terrorism is deployed. Giving in to it only adds to its effectiveness and increases its use.
Taking the decision to deal with it, as the Israelis have done, is brutal but effective in bringing the problem to wider attention. If it brings opprobrium to Hamas’s tactics – and hence to terrorists worldwide – it is arguable that the Israelis are doing the right thing. To do otherwise is against all our interests in the long term. Innocents have died before now for greater causes – why should this time be different?
I take Ken’s point and he raises a serious problem but I would like to add two comments.
Firstly you seem to imply that only two extreme responses to terrorism are possible: either we become more brutal than they are or we give in to them. Like President Obama I reject this dichotomy. A range of responses is possible and we must be intelligent enough to select responses which are likely to be effective but which do not undermine the fundamental values of our society. You presumably are not saying that because terrorists place such a low value on human life we can only counter them by valuing it even less. If we can only win by becoming even more barbaric than the barbarians, where is the victory? And whose?
Of course we must be prepared to respond to terrorist threats militarily but proportionality requires that we always attempt to pursue the least worst of all possible courses of action. Israel has slaughtered some 1300 Palestinians most of whom seem to have been innocent civilians including some 400 children. They can justify this only if they can demonstrate that all reasonable alternative courses of action were likely to have led to even more catastrophic consequences.
Furthermore there can be no purely military solution to terrorism. We also have to eradicate the injustices which drive ordinary young people into terrorism and generate the justifiable grievances which terrorist organisations can exploit. To pursue only the first approach, to the massive detriment of the second, does not strike me as very intelligent. It is merely storing up even worse problems for the future.
The second point I would make is that I wasn’t questioning the likely efficacy of Israel’s assault on Gaza only their refusal to accept responsibility for the ensuing deaths. I think a distinction can be made between justification and responsibility. If a mugger comes at me with a knife I may be justified in shooting him, if he comes at me waving his bare fists I may not be, but in both cases if I shot him I would be responsible for his death. Israel may claim that the assault on Gaza was justified because it was the least worst option and although it led to the deaths of 1300 people, including 400 children, the consequences of not taking this action would have been far, far worse. If an Israeli spokesperson attempted to make such a justification we could assess its plausibility but, so far as I am aware, none has. What they cannot claim is that Israel is not responsible for these deaths. The deaths are the direct consequences of IDF actions authorised by the Israel government. Even if these parties genuinely believe that the actions were justified they still bear full moral and legal responsibility for each and every resulting death.
Dear Jon,
Congratulations to you for continuing to ask the searching questions necessary to establish the truth surrounding the slaughter of so many innocent lives.
Mr Regev’s position seems increasingly to be that Gazan’s are legitimate targets for aggression by Israel because: a) they live in their own homeland b) they support their own democratically elected government.
On that basis, any democracy in the world would be fair game for such aggression!
Please keep on seeking for the truth without fear or favour.
Jon,
You showed true professionalism when handling Mark Regev last night.
Many times now (not least during another excellent C4 News live interview – the one Alex Thomson did recently), this man (Regev – not Alex) has shown an incredible, almost infantile behaviour in the way he continues to deny and blame Hamas for just about everything.
Recently, when asked how come the death toll was so high in Gaza whilst it was a lot less in Israel, he replied it was because the Israeli were now so good at hiding and seeking shelter for the Hamas attacks – since they have had such a long experience of it.
He reminds me of a child being caught out – showing a remarkable skill in finding excuses like.. ‘the dog ate my Maths book’ or.. ‘he started – not me’. And – as when you get caught up and entangled in lies…it never works.
So – who is one to believe? Well, as the Dispatches last night clearly showed, we have not been shown the whole truth here in the Western world. And it makes me so angry.
But – judging from what I actually have seen, I put my trust in someone like Mr Ging (UNRWA) rather than Mr Regev. John Ging’s way of describing the death of those two Palestinian children, saying ‘ they are as innocent as they are dead..’ surely must have brought it home to the most hardened human being.
Everyone can see the people of Gaza are like fenced in deer, for people to hunt, on a Sunday afternoon.
Thanks for being who you are and for digging deep, Jon.
Congratulations Jon, you once again demonstrated professionalism and restraint in dealing with Mark Regev. A man, like the government he represents, who clearly appears to be detached from any sense of reality. My concern is that Israeli policy regarding the territory will not change, unless and until, the EU boycotts all Israeli products.
Lastnight’s interview with Mr Regev was a tough one to sit through, and people will make of it various opposing things, I suspect.
But I suspect too, Jon, that you’d say your concern in your work is simply reporting the truth, as far as we can get at it.
Mr Regev’s aggression of tone is one thing – we can judge it however. But the responses themselves, transcripted, seem to illustrate Israel’s apparently consistent official practice, at least whenever I’m watching – answer direct questions by pointing elsewhere. The question: “Did you do X?” might be met by the answer: “We didn’t start it.”; “Did you do Y?” by: “What about North Korea?”. “Did you do Z” may even just get talked over.
Passion is one thing. It’s obviously hard to hold in, in the face of such events and issues. Nor should it always be, I think. But decisions and actions taken are reportable truth. So too should be responsibility.
As ever, thanks for doing your best in the middle of the issues, Jon. It surely says as much about passion as it does professionalism.
Did you actually watch the same interview I watched (twice now). If anyone was aggressive it was Jon Snow, and without justification. He simply would not let Mr Regev make his points. That is not professional, whether you agree with Regev or not, he should at least be given opportunity to answer the questions, and not be cut off simply because the interviewer doesn’t like his answers.
It was interesting to see a different approach the following night when Jon interviewed Raymond McCord about the proposed compensation for victims of the NI troubles. Mr McCord was permitted to use similar arguments without being interrupted and cut off.
It looks ever so like one rule for the Jews, and another for everyone else. By the way, I’m neither Jewish, nor Zionist, just a thinking watcher of Channel 4 news (most nights).
We applaud Jon’s interview with mark Regev. In fact we did just that!! The absurdity of Regev’s attempts to deflect clear Israeli blame on to Hamas left Regev stumbling and embarrassed.This is a first!!! On the whole the media coverage of Israel’s massacre of Palestinians has been pro Israeli. Interviews have been both anodyne and quiescent giving the israelis a very comfortable time. The role of western journalists now is to keep alive the exposure of israel’s culpability in Gaza. There is much clear evidence of Israel’s criminality. A crossroads in the conduct of Israel has been reached and the world knows this. The world will no longer tolerate Israel’s brutality with impunity.
An excellent interview Jon in the face of an incredible display of mendacity and obfuscation. That you managed to keep your cool in the face of gross provocation and insinuation was truly impressive. It’s much to the credit of the channel 4 news team that the claims of these spokespeople are confronted head on. Israel has comprehensively lost the moral argument (certainly not helped by the efforts of Mark Regev et al) over the actions in Gaza and C4 News has helped greatly in this respect.
Surely the Israeli government must realise that Mr Regev is acting as a recruiting sergeant for Hamas by making Israel look as bad as he did last night? There must be a better way to put their case.
It’s impossible to get a non-sycophanitc post up here.
I submitted two posts that point to Jon’s bias and errors, yet neither was put up – whereas the sycophantic ones praising Jon’s one-sided and biased journalism have all been approved.
The one negative post that did manage to sneak through, has since been deleted.
And Jon has the audacity to talk about censorship and management of the news, when his moderators are killing any dissent.
Appalling interview, appalling show.
Well said! If only my fellow Brits will lose their blinkers and realise that their TV media has been hijacked by less than professional opinionated journalists.
The only news channel that appears to be showing any attempt to be balanced in their reporting of the Gaza conflict is Sky News. I often work in the USA and find their news coverage, in general, abysmal; but it is even more sad the way that many of our TV stations are no longer displaying true professional objectivity in their reporting.
Even if Israel is in the wrong, is it too much to ask for equally critical reporting of the other side and then letting the viewer decide? Instead we have Jon foisting his views on us.
Come on folks we deserve better journalism than this.
It’s impossible to get a non-sycophanitc post up here
Oh, so posts have to be sycophantic to Israel to keep you happy?
What the Dickens are you on about? I agree with Barry.
Mr Dickens have you not considered the possibility that your side is sycophantic to the Islamo lobby. Where was their outpouring of outrage when our innocents got slaughtered by their co-religionists on the tube in London.
Excellent interviw Jon as ever. The more I watch and hear from Mark Regev the more I feel that what we are really seeing here with Israel is a case of the abuser growing up to become an abuser themselves.
I am increasingly of the opinion that Israel has no real interest in the roadmap, as long as the rest of the world tools them up with weapons such as the phosphorus bombs we saw the effects of – they will continue to use them in defiance of the Geneva Convention,
Obama cannot do this on his own, but a good start would be to place an embargo on these types of ordinance getting to either side in this conflict. Then rebuild Gaza with US money, Israel may not be so keen to flatten US funded buildings in future. I would mention the safety of Palestinians here but Israel have made it very plain that they have no concern about that. The rest of us need to show that we will not tolerate our governments making mealy-mouthed protests about Israel’s conduct whilst being unwilling to enforce UN resolutions going back 32 years.
A note on moderation: abusive, offensive and defamtory comments will not be posted. All posts are pre-moderated, 8am – 9pm weekdays only.
Thansk,
Snowblog Editor
A shameful interview! Anything but professional or objective the way Jon dominated and cut off the interview. Jon came across pompous, arrogant and biased. Simple question – why is Hamas not questioned so robustly? If they were dealt with equally then perhaps I could have some respect for Jon, but in the absence of this, I can only despair at how our media is losing its objectivity and balance.
Hamas did not just kill over 1000 Israelis and use white phosphorous (the new improved Napalm with built-in get out clause of being illuminating) – they also do not make themselves constantly available to TV news – usually they are in the middle of being bombed or otherwise hiding from the same.
Jon Snow reflects my questions and I believe I am fair and just. As far as I am concerned there is one entirely guilty party in the conflict… those in power.
Evil people may use children as a shield – but what sort of evil does it take to know that and then slaughter the shield ragardless?
Tragic, heartbreaking and indefensible by any of the parties involved in this conflict..
Namaste,
TIna Louise
I wholeheartedly agree. Be fair, question both sides robustly, otherwise we could conclude with some justification that Channel 4 has a pro-Palestinian bias.
Well I’ll go against the sychophantic mainstream evident on this blog.
I was apalled at Jon Snow’s handling of Mark Regev. First of all its clear the Israelis have not broken any humanitarian law concerning weapons used, because Jon Snow couched every accusation with a caveat of “possible” or “potential”. Typical bull from C4’s heaving loaded and biased news making style.
Secondly it was pretty obvious Regev had Jon Snow on the ropes when he asked him is he considered Hamas an authoritarian regime. Snow cut him off and never answered the question. I must say that was pretty pathetic way to end the interview and appeared to me as if Snow just did not want to go there…for obvious reasons.
The fact is that while Israel can and should be condemned for some of their activities in Gaza during the invasion, Jon Snow and the C4 News clan seem unable to conuntenance the possibility that Hamas are controlling the news agenda in Gaza. Until C4 starts to act in an impartial manner it is hard to take anything seriously.
Fantastic piece of journalism,Jon and god!! what an enfuriating interview to watch!
A truly wrongful and culpable individual, Mark regev. How he can sit there and project a chain of lies and then claim that the Israeli army is not guilty of those allegations of using phosphorous and fragmentation bombs. How do you remain so calm, Jon, just how do you do it?
If that wasn’t bearable enough to watch, then your dispatches program screened later in the evening really did it for me. You and your channel 4 team did a truly remarkable job in inveiling what really happened or is still happening in Gaza.
I think other channels should follow suit. I feel it is absolutely detrimental that we should witness the true event of the goings on in Gaza. We are so wrapped up in cotton wool and protected from these namby pamby water sheds, that we are truly in oblivion to what injustices are taking place. Well done all and keep up the good work.
Also, I would like to know if there is any way of finding out what happened to that poor kid who was boght into the hospital screaming with a gaping hole in his/her stomach, from which the ribcage was visible.
Please please could reply with this info if possible.
Thank You
Simone
I could not resist to congradulate John Snow’s efforts to show the truth on media. So far westren media was highly targeted for not showing the truth. The story of a burn child and half eaten by dogs was not confirmed in our coummunity so this programme gave us an evidance that it really happened in todays modren world. May GOD bring peace in the whole world. Ameen.
A note on moderation: abusive, offensive and defamatory comments will not be posted. All posts are pre-moderated, 8am – 9pm weekdays only.
Thanks,
Snowblog Editor
As much as I applaud Jon’s questioning of Mark Regev last night I did feel that he did slip up towards the end. I believe that trying to get a back and white answer to the use of the weapons was too easy for him to dodge. I feel that Jon should of acknowledged the right of Israel to protect itself, which it has, but then pointed out to Mark Regev that if you are one of the good guys, you have to behave in a certain way. This I feel would of taken the edge off of people thinking Jon was being unfair attacking Israel, but then made the point that they can’t be this heavy handed. Perhaps somebody should remind Mark Regev that the history of religion is littered with demands by their god to wipe out their enemies. So it’s understandable that we don’t trust Israel in this matter
Mark Regev, much like Tzipi Livni, Ehud Olmert, Ehud Barak, Benyamin Netenyahu, Avital Leibovich and all the other mouthpieces of the Israeli pretence, is devoid of any credibility. He never can answer a simple question. I have watched numerous interviews of him on alternate news channels and he simply cannot comprehend a simple question.
Well perhaps he does comprehend but chooses not to address them. He thinks he is smarter than all viewers and the interviewer too. Mark Regev does not realise that the world is now aware of the “Zionist waltz” when faced with truth or reality.
Mark Regev showed in this interview that the reason the israelis didn’t want the press in gaza was because they knew their would be aspects of the conflict which they could not explain. When questioned about these he floundered and accused Jonathan Miller of being a mouthpeice for Hamas propaganda.
I for one was sick and tired of Israeli government spokespeople being able to fob off questions about questionable conduct by the IDF with ‘we’ll investigate, but it was hamas’ fault’. Now they have been given access, the journalists are beginning to piece together a story closer to the truth. I fully expect squirming on both sides when more of the details are exposed.
Snow and Channel 4 have a history of reporting that can at best be described as partial.
I think Regev’s points were well made, namely that you seek only to concern yourselves with the actions of the IDF, ignoring any of the foregoing rocketing of Israel from Gaza.
I well remember Snow browbeating an Israeli politician in 2006, trivialising the effects Kassams from Gaza made on Sderot. At that time I emailed Snow to suggest that if Kassams were so harmless, he should take his family to live in Sderot for a month and then let us know what he thought.
Unsurprisingly, I didn’t hear back from Snow or Channel 4 then, and I imagine this email will disappear into the ether too.
John Snow….
You ROCK!!!!!!!!!!!
Well done Jon Snow and your team for exposing Mark Regev.
It seems that Sharon’s withdrawal of Jewish settlers from Gaza was to facilitate a little ethnic cleansing of the Palestinian population…. what hope is there for the West bank?
I would like to know if John has any plans to interview an Hamas spokesman in the future to gain any balance on the whole argument?
He has in the past, and the Hamas spokesman got first class treatment from Jon.
No harassment, no cutting him off.
He has interviewed Hamas and ,,,had no cause to try to drag truth out of the man – HE answered the questions put to him.
What a releif to watch a journalist actually challenge an Israeli spokesperson, rather than to give them an oppotrunity to spout yet more propaganda. Thank Jon
No, Mark Regev appeared to hand Jon Snow his backside, and Snow had to cut him off at the end so as not to face further embarssment.
We ask again Jon: Is Hamas an authroriatrian regime in your opinion? The silence from Snow and C4 is deafening.
Why is this all about how Jon should answer? He is the interviewer, the media – not the one being interviewed. Mark Regev reacted according to his nature – that is not down to Jon, but himself.
Why are you interrogating Jon Snow. He’s one of the few courageous journalists at the moment who is able to challenge Israel’s slick PR (unlike the spineless BBC). I am sick to death with Israel’s officials spewing out their reherased lies, with their blank and robot like faces. Well done Jon – do not give in to any form of bullying either by Israel or of their supporters in this country.
You call this a debate? Where you only publish those opinions which square with C4?
You people really do believe your own hype.
Israel is not a democracy; it is a theocracy. In response to the recent carnage in Gaza there have been authoratative cries from Arab quarters to the effect that the Palestinians do not possess the authority to give away an inch of Ottoman Palestine.
I watched dispatches show last night and I was impressed by John’s bravery and courage in confronting the truth. Congarts John!
what truth?! can u not hear him constantly saying “alleged attacks” which means there is NO evidence!!!
I see the defenders of the indefensible have had the Megaphone call! Well done Jon, I am sure there were thousands of people cheering to see Regev losing his cool and showing his true colours. It must have been the mention of war crimes investigations, which I see that the Israeli government have been expecting and are now preparing for. As I saw someone say : “They are fully cognizant of their crimes.”
In the absence of action from world leaders I hope the media, channel 4 in particular, continues to confront Israeli Propoganda. In the ultimate hope that world opinion will hold this aggressive state accountable.
Well done Jon. You are a role model to myself and my fellow journalism students. Your defence of your colleague’s fine reporting in the face of that spokesperson was admirable.
And dare I say we saw a bit of anger building up in you as Regev tried to discredit one of the finest reporters Channel 4 News has at their disposal.
Keep up the good work Jon. The fourth estate and those interested in consuming real journalism need you.
What a load ot tosh and drivel! If you as a prospective journalist regarded that interview as a model of objectivity and professionalism then God save us all.
The interview was rather a crass and, dare I say it, embarrasing display of grandstanding on the part of Jon, even if Israel deserves, or not, to be hauled over the coals for their actions in Gaza, he should have displayed more self restraint in his handling of the interview.
I truly expected a lot more of Jon, I hope that this interview was a one off aberration.
Another excellent interview Mr Snow! I applaud your integrity and courage.Thank You.
It seems such a shame that in all this debate no one has thoughts on where we go from here and how to obtain peace in the middle east. Jon’s approach seems to enhance hostilatiy on both sides of the argument. Truth is one thing, but what works is reconciliation (South Africa, NI). I was left not quite knowing the point of the interview, other than to wind one another up. Unhelpful, as has been much of the media coverage.
In the 20 years that I have been watching Jon on Channel 4 last nights interview with Regev was by far his best, ever ! If my license money goes to supporting channel 4 news and paying Jon’s salary I will never again begrudge handing over my money! Well done Jon I want more….!
Of course you would say that wouldn’t you? I would rather see my money going to journalists, that whilst asking tough questions, are also seeking to build bridges to a final peaceful settlement between Arabs and Jews, rather than trying to score cheap points.
So the question is do you want more…. or do you want PEACE?
I saw the interview while visiting Beersheva (I am American). A rocket sent from Gaza landed 100 m from the house where I was at the time. I am pretty sure, in the US, a “journalist” like Jon would be cleaning dishes in a Macdonalds. The guy is completely unprofessional.
Well done Mr. Snow! If only the BBC had the bravery to employ journalists of your courage and integrity. So now that the lies and brutality of the Israeli government and “defence” forces are slowly being exposed, is it not about time the international community addressed this apalling situation with an arms embargo (on BOTH sides) and force Israel to contribute substantially to the cost of rebuilding Gaza or they can forget their “favoured trading partner” arrangement with the EU. On the other hand will it just blow over again and be soon forgotten as it has happened so many times before? I despair!
Jon Snow was grandstanding. Mark Regev inadvertently bought into his bullyboy tactics by calling him `’Sir” so often. Israeli interviewee’s presumably receive intensive training but there needs to be more. While Regev got in some good points he should have asked Snow, as every journalist concerned with the loss of life in Gaza should be asked, What else can Israel do to stop the daily barrage of rockets?
This is a ludicrous suggestion. The job of a journalist is to question politicians on the actions they take not to suggest alternative courses of action to them. It is the job of politicians to consider all viable strategies and to ensure that the strategies they actually adopt conform to basic moral norms. If Jon Snow spent his time telling politicians what actions they OUGHT to be taking, a task I am sure he would himself admit he is not qualified to perform, then he would certainly not be the excellent journalist that he is.
While the tough interview with Regev is to be applauded, why was one of the main, root causes of the problems in the area ignored? The West bank settlements, widely considered illegal, have been almost totally overlooked as an issue. Is it because there aren’t any sexy pictures of destruction to show? All our news broadcasters are guilty of the same thing; getting bored with an issue if they can’t come up with emotive footage to fill in their allotted time. Is this because the editors assume we can’t cope with the idea that the Palestinian problem has not just one, current cause, but a great many injustices inflicted on the unhappy people of the country over years?
I felt extremely proud of Jon Snow in his attempts to make Mark Regev feel responsible for the horrific – and possibly illegal – massacre in Gaza.
Sir,
If Mr Michael Donnelly thinks Jon Snows interview is an example of the fourth estate at its best, either Mr Donnelly is only at the very beginning of his career as a student journalist (and has a great deal yet to learn), the course has some serious short-comings in how to present a balanced report or the student misunderstands the role of a role model in getting at the truth in a complex situation such as the Gaza.
Regards
T. Malcolm Lakin
Brilliant interview, I love it when the person being interviewed comes out of their media shell and turns into their true selves… very telling. You have a wonderful skill Jon.
Namaste,
Tina Louise
As tragic as the Gaza Crisis is, I feel that peoples judgement of the interview is being swayed one way or the other by their take on the issues.
Sadly Jon allowed his personal bias to slip out and stepped well outside the realm of professional journalism
Jon’s interview skills can hardly be described as brilliant and wonderful.
Hopefully he will take heed and adopt the standards that all journalists should ascribe to which is the highest standards of objectivity, professionalism and impartiality.
The answer to what should be done in the face of rocket attacks by Hamas is not one for the media to answer – it is a political question and maybe the toughest one.
I don’t have the answer but I do know what it isn’t …killing Palestinians and allowing children to die for an adult argument.
Please, please never stop broadcasting Channel 4 News! It’s the only one worth watching because issues are looked at from every angle and Jon Snow gives everyone a hard time. I think a movement should be started to allow some of our licence fee to go towards paying for C4 news. If it ever comes off our screens, we’ll end up with what’s left: fluffy, wishy-washy news, which lies by omission. AND, and, C4 News is the only news that covers certain stories that are left untouched by the BBC. (I’m thinking updates on Civil Rights era stuff.) And all this is coming from someone who didn’t like your sneering report on Padre Pio. I’ll let you off that one because the rest is so good. P.S Jon Snow for a New Year’s Honour!
I must have seen a different interview than most of the other commenters? I don’t support israel (or hamas for that matter), but all I saw was a barrage of questions and a wilful rudeness in refusing to listen to the answers (and a wilful misunderstanding of some of them). Jon was clearly biased, and his refusal to consider or admit that perhaps people in Gaza are not altogether free to tell all of the truth was deeply flawed. He was trying to focus a situation with a large number of grey areas into a black and white picture full of “baby killing israelis”, and in the end doing only israel a favour, by apprearing so irrationally biased.
The particular notion that some quality of “our reporter” automatically makes the interviewee totally safe, free and honest is laughable, and the obvious and ongoing manipulation of the press by the people of gaza (and who can blame them) should be at least pointed out for honestys sake.
(on another note: What sort of idiot stands on a balcony and watches a nearby air raid? do these people have no shelters? Or is that just evidence that they (foolishly) trust the israeli targetting more than channel 4 do?)
Well Channel 4 News last night seemed to prove Regev was telling the truth and we have been somewhat misled. I challenge you all to watch last nights report on Gaza and Hamas engineering the destruction of civlian areas, titled “Did Hamas use human sheilds” and then watch the Snow and Regev interview again. See who looks naive.
A superb interview. I’ve been waiting weeks for someone to start asking the “bleeding obvious” questions of the Israeli spokespersons. A pity you weren’t able to ask why the compliant West Bank was still having it’s land stolen – that would have fixed the arrogant Regev.
It’s very strange to me that a country could enforce such a media blockade on another country – even when one of the borders is water. Why does Israel control every entry into Gaza? Why can’t a journalist swim in, paracute down, or simply walk over the fields?
I am as confused as you about this R.Stannard – I don’t understand what right, what law, what agreement prevented the media being allowed to go into Gaza.
I have not known of this type of restriction before – particularly as it was the Israelis keeping the media out of a country they were firing on! Maybe America and the UK could apply this tactic in Iraq …how would that be viewed?
I agree Katharine – in fact I would happily pay a subscription to prevent Channel 4 News ever going off air. I trust no other TV news and rely on my 4News ‘fix’ to get the stories straight.
The answer to what should be done in the face of rocket attacks by Hamas is not one for the media to answer – it is a political question.
Jon just asked questions and pushed to get answers to those questions – that’s what journalists are supposed to do.
As to the ‘training’ that Israeli spokemen get (and your suggestion that they need more) – surely telling the truth wouldn’t require training?
I don’t have the answer but I do know what it isn’t … it isn’t using children as human shields and it isn’t shooting/bombing those human shields.
Allowing children to die for an adult argument is not an answer to any situation.
Do you work for the Israel army by any chance? How inhumane can you get. I will not say anymore as I am totally disgusted by how low some people can think.
I agree.
Some of the gushing comments about Jon Snow’s performance are as bad as the claims that he was completely unprofessional. Any interview with Mark Regev is unlikely to go down in history as a textbook example of how to get to the facts of the case, but I thought Snow slipped towards the end when he changed tack. I didn’t think it was inexcusable for him to terminate the interview so quickly when Regev evidently decided it was his role to barrack his questioner, instead of the other way round.
All this should be contrasted, though, with the apparent admission by Regev in a C4 interview that rocket attacks from Gaza practically ceased for three months before the IDF killed 6 members of Hamas on Nov 4th, breaking the ceasefire. There are claims now that Regev said no such thing and that the trascript of that interview is pieced together. If that’s true, I guess Channel 4 will repudiate the clip, which is easily found on YouTube. If not, it’s something for the Israeli spokesman’s defenders to ponder on.
Oooh! I loved it!! Congratulations!! Your job is admirable, especially for a starting journalist like myself
Leave a comment
* Required field.