New York, N.Y., June 25, 2001 … Contrary to the widespread negative assumptions about U.S. media coverage in the Middle East, the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) today released findings of an editorial survey of the nation’s largest daily newspapers, which showed overwhelming support for Israel and significant criticism of the Palestinian Authority and its leader, Yasir Arafat.

As a follow-up to a December 2000 survey, ADL reviewed more than 50 editorials from major U.S. newspapers during the three-week period between May 22^nd through June 18^th. The survey divided the editorials into two categories: General news editorials that included reaction to the widespread violence in the territories and the Tel Aviv terrorist bombing that killed 21 Israeli youth (41); and those which address the U.S.-brokered cease-fire (12).

"Our survey shows that the editorial boards of the major newspapers across the country are viewing the situation in the Middle East in a realistic and objective manner," said Glen A. Tobias, ADL National Chairman and Abraham H. Foxman, ADL National Director. "Many of the editorials are in synch with the policies of the Bush administration and reflect the overall American perception of the situation on the ground in Israel."

In the weeks prior to the cease-fire negotiations, editorial opinions were focused on portraying Israel in a positive light with much emphasis placed on the policy of restraint against continued Palestinian violence. The New York Times and The Wall Street Journal both editorialized on this issue by praising Prime Minister Sharon and his steadfastness against escalation.

During this time, many more editorials were openly critical of and hostile to Arafat, with 23 editorials directly blaming him for the continuing violence and creating a climate of hatred. Generally, Arafat’s peace overtures were dismissed as calculated tools for his goal of gaining further concessions from Israel, with a widespread sense that his promises were virtually worthless. Additionally, The Chicago Sun-Times criticized other Arab leaders for encouraging the Intifada to continue, saying: "irresponsible bombast only encourages Arafat to make war."

The terror bombing at a Tel Aviv nightclub was condemned by all of the newspapers that commented on the subject, including The Chicago Tribune, The Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel and The Dallas Morning News. In the days following the attack, which left 21 Israeli youth dead and scores more injured, the St. Petersburg (FL) Times weighed in on the incident by praising Prime Minister Sharon’s "remarkable restraint."

Additionally, 11 other editorials surveyed during this period focused on the findings of the Mitchell Report, with several arguing strongly in favor of U.S. diplomatic involvement in the Middle East. The New York Times, The Washington Post and The Houston Chronicle took this line.

Two editorials during this period focused on portraying Israel in a negative light, the Louisville, Kentucky Courier-Journal and the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.

In regards to the recent, U.S.-brokered cease-fire agreement, ADL’s survey shows that 75 percent of newspaper editorials devoted to the topic approved of the agreement. Several expressed criticism of Arafat and his policies, particularly in New York’s Newsday, which referred to Arafat as a "key player," who "has initiated, encouraged and orchestrated some, if not all, of the violence."

The newspapers supportive of the Bush Administration’s cease-fire efforts, were The San Francisco Chronicle, The Boston Globe, The Washington Post and the Minneapolis Star-Tribune. The New York Times called the agreement "effective intervention."

Three of the newspapers surveyed showed a lack of enthusiasm toward the Bush Middle East cease-fire plan. The New York Post, and The Boston Herald both editorialized that the agreement was merely in name only and The Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel said "no one, least of all the signatories, is optimistic that the latest cease-fire agreement between Israelis and Palestinians will be scrupulously honored."

ADL has historically surveyed U.S. newspaper editorial stances in the wake of important developments in the region. This survey follows two informal surveys taken at the initial outbreak of the violence in late September, 2000 and during the seven-week period of October 16^th through December 1^st, 2000. Both were found to have had strong pro-Israel sentiments prevalent on the editorial pages.