Numerous headlines from news outlets around the world described Israeli leaders threatening to stop an aid boat carrying activists from reaching Gaza. Most heads fell short of the reality of the situation that the stories went on to describe.
Here are just a few examples:
Israel vows to prevent an aid boat carrying Greta Thunberg and other activists from reaching Gaza (AP)
Israel vows to stop aid boat carrying Greta Thunberg from reaching Gaza
(NBC News)
Israel Vows to Stop Aid Ship With Greta Thunberg Aboard From Reaching Gaza
(The New York Times)
While one might assume from such headlines various meanings from “stop” or “prevent” or “block,” they aren’t very precise terms. And they don’t accurately describe the more ominous meaning that the stories go on to describe in more detail in the subheads or ledes.
Did you get from the headlines that Israel is prepared to use military force?
Here’s the lede from the Times:
“Israel vowed on Sunday to prevent a ship carrying a dozen pro-Palestinian activists and some aid from reaching Gaza, saying its military would use “any means necessary” to prevent the vessel from breaching an Israeli naval blockade of the coastal enclave.”
It would have been simple to add the phrase “any means necessary” to these headlines. Here are a few better ones, which begin to reflect the potentially lethal aspect of these threats.
Israeli military ordered to block aid flotilla carrying Greta Thunberg (Politico.eu)
Israel orders military to stop Gaza-bound yacht carrying Greta Thunberg (Reuters)
Israel orders military to block aid flotilla carrying Greta Thunberg from reaching Gaza (France 24)
The threat is real, as Israel has attacked aid vessels before. Several stories noted Israel’s attack in 2010 that killed nine people on an aid boat from Turkey. A 10th passenger died years later from his wounds, according to the Times.
Legal or illegal presence?
Meanwhile, coverage of the assault appear to be letting federal officials misrepresent the legal status of the man arrested in Boulder, Colorado, in what officials describe as a racially-motivated attack on demonstrators who were seeking the release of Israeli hostages.
Federal officials have described the Egyptian national as being in the country illegally, since he overstayed a visa that expired in February 2023. This does not appear to make the suspect’s presence illegal in the U.S., as feds also confirmed that he had applied for asylum a month after arriving in the U.S. in 2022 on a tourist visa.
The truth is unclear – likely intentionally so – as those federal officials quoted in the stories about this issue declined to provide further details, such as the status of the suspect’s asylum case. I haven’t found any stories that explore this issue or even question the veracity of the claims be federal officials whether he is illegally in the U.S.
I’m no immigration lawyer, but it appears that the status of asylees only becomes legal or illegal after officials rule on their asylum applications, according to numerous websites of federal agencies and immigration attorneys. Until then, they are allowed to stay in the U.S.
Well done! I’m sure there will be many more misleading headlines to come now that the National Guard is in Los Angeles. Keep turning up the analytical heat!