How does the Arab press fair in relation to the rest of the world? It must be around the bottom, if not at the floor of the sea; corruption, along with low salaries and tough censorship, has eaten away at the roots of the profession. I still await the publication of documents from the Gaddafi era about Arab journalists. They visited Tripoli and stayed for days and weeks, and months, in its hotels, waiting to be paid off. Meanwhile, western journalism provides me with lessons about how the profession should be practiced, unlike the situation in our countries. I was in New York to attend the session of the United Nations General Assembly, or the Palestine session. On the sidelines, I followed a press issue that began with an article in the Columbia Journalism Review, written by Max Blumenthal, on 14 September. In it, he accused Ethan Bronner, the head of The New York Times' Jerusalem bureau, of a conflict of interest. Bronner signed a contract with Lone Star, a public relations firm that arranged paid lecture appearances for him. Blumenthal noted that the head of Lone Star is Charley Levine, a well-known Israeli P.R. man, a right winger, and the consultant to a number of prominent Zionists. He was also a reserve spokesperson for the Israeli army. Blumenthal studied six instances of conflict of interest in Bronner's work, such as covering the Lone Star clients such as the Jewish National Fund and Danny Danon, the deputy speaker of the Knessset and the chairman of World Likud. The original article sparked a number of comments, including another article by Blumenthal himself. This led the public editor (or ombudsman) of the Times, Arthur Brisbane, to publish a virtual verdict on the controversy on 25 September. Brisbane said it was not enough for the newspaper to avoid a conflict of interest, but should also avoid the appearance of one, since the damage is the same in both cases. He consulted two experts in press ethics and arrived at the conclusion that Bronner's relationship with Lone Star was not unethical, as Blumenthal maintained, but that it was an unwise relationship that gave the appearance of corruption, and even though it was not unethical, this relationship should be halted. I read that Lone Star arranged for Bronner to give six speeches out of 75 that he gave while bureau chief in Jerusalem over the last three and a half years. He should have informed his newspaper that he received more than $5,000 a year in speaking fees, but did not do so, arguing that he thought notification was required if this sum came from a single speech. The ombudsman's article reminded me of a previous problem Bronner encountered, when his son served in the Israeli army. This prompted the former ombudsman, Clark Hoyt, to ask that he be transferred, to avoid a conflict of interest. However, the executive editor the time, Bill Keller, supporter Bronner's remaining in his post because he had done nothing wrong personally. I do not believe that any Arab journalist like myself can claim to be neutral in something like this. However, I will try, and say that Bronner and his critic Blumenthal are both Jews, just like the owners of The New York Times, which describes itself as the most important paper in the world. Even so, I have never seen mistakes in the items with Bronner's byline in a newspaper I have been reading for decades. The news is always correct, although I always have objections about some of the Likudnik op-ed writers, not the correspondents. When Hoyt asked that Bronner be transferred, he said that The New York Times should be truly independent, and be perceived that way. Brisbane began his article by observing that the controversy around Bronner took place on the eve of Palestine's request for membership in the UN and the newspaper should stay away from a conflict interest, or even the appearance of one, even if it is false. Thus, I wait to see what will be punished about the secrets of the Gaddafi era. I write this fully aware that the Arab press does not have (or only rarely has) the west's capacity for professional journalism. It is a prisoner of fear, censorship and a lack of access to job opportunities. The basic rule is that this or that newspaper in our countries is affiliated with a given country, or rich individual, and the same goes for the journalists. However, I know Arab newspapers that defend their independence and pay the price, and I know some truly independent Arab journalists. Some of them have paid with their lives for the independence of the profession. And then, there is the majority. [email protected]
