Viajero wrote:
Several of us were discussing the topic on the IRC channel in December (Anthere may remember this because she was one of them) and this question came up. One person said they thought WP (EN) had a pro-Israeli bias. Another said a pro-Palestinian bias. A third said neither POV was accurately represented.
I haven't seen Rashomon, but I understand the reference: three or more people saw the same event and give widely divergent accounts of it. I think this cuts to the core of the difficulty in describing Middle East history and current events.
Who among us can see without using a mental filter? I do not claim this ability. Despite my high estimate of my own objectivity, I am uncomfortably aware that from time to time I am simply WRONG.
I daresay portions of articles are indeed tinged (or infected) with pro-Israeli or pro-Palestinian bias. We might never eliminate either of these biases entirely. But we can work at it.
The key is identification: if it smells, change it. Refactor the article so that it says the same thing but /attributes/ POV to its proponent. I don't know why this is so hard, but (A) it really is hard and (B) it really is important.
Let's do it.
Ed Poor, aka Uncle Ed