It is a clear abuse of power when editors let their personal political views dictate content decisions.
Samuel Weisz
(JNS)
On many campuses across the United Kingdom, including at the University of Exeter, where I study, the prevailing “campus norm” regarding Israel is overwhelmingly one-sided. Marked by protests filled with extreme anti-Israel rhetoric and persistent propaganda campaigns, there’s little space or tolerance for alternative viewpoints. Attempts by pro-Israel students to engage in campus discussion, such as through the student newspapers, are frequently stonewalled.
At Exeter, for instance, the Exeposé, like other student papers across the United Kingdom, seems to have shifted from being an impartial platform for students to serving as an ideological mouthpiece for anti-Israel activists. Its coverage of Israel-related issues is consistently skewed, and when pro-Israel students try to contribute alternative viewpoints, we’re either ignored or pressured to conform. Recently, some of the content has felt like thinly veiled attacks on Zionists, disguised as serious reporting, but lacking in journalistic integrity.
When I approached a member of the Exeposé editorial team to propose an article on the importance of pro-Israel voices on campus, I was told that Israel-Palestine wasn’t a topic they were looking to cover. They said that despite publishing multiple articles on the subject since the terror attacks on Oct. 7, 2023, all with a clear anti-Israel stance. And it left me questioning whether the editorial process welcomes diverse viewpoints.
It is a clear abuse of power when editors let their personal political views dictate content decisions, which raises questions about the alignment with university policies on expression and inclusivity. While editorial discretion is important, editors should focus on the relevance of a topic, its timeliness, grammar and sources, not on silencing the voices of students who differ in opinion.
Articles containing inflammatory and unsubstantiated accusations are being presented as fact in student newspapers without any meaningful challenge or verification. One recent piece published by the Exeposé was intended to discuss how the Israel-Palestine conflict is “shaping student experiences.” The goal was to talk to students of various religious and cultural groups to examine campus sentiment and identify effects related to the conflict. However, several interviewees hijacked this opportunity, using it to spread hate and misinformation.
One such baseless claim made in the piece by anti-Israel students was that they are “spied on and monitored” by “CAMERA-affiliated” students to silence their views. (CAMERA, the Committee for Accuracy in Middle Reporting and Analysis, is a nonpartisan organization that promotes accurate media coverage of the Middle East.) These and similar claims were published without further questioning or context, nor was there an opportunity to respond by CAMERA representatives on campus. This would have revealed that all of the accusations in the article are incorrect. We, the pro-Israel students on campus, have been much more welcoming to opposing viewpoints than the treatment we have received. We have made every effort to engage in dialogue with students who hold opposing views, inviting them to events and trying to create spaces for discussion and understanding.
What’s more concerning is the personal nature of these accusations. The interviewees constantly targeted “CAMERA-affiliated students,” but there are only two of us on campus. These statements are not only false but a direct attack on individual students, without verification or giving us any chance to respond. This pattern doesn’t just harm those targeted; it damages the credibility of the student newspaper and undermines the campus’s ability to engage in fair and open discussion.
In an article published about yellow ribbons that were put up on campus for the Israeli hostages, the Palestine Society, a group on campus, was given a proper chance to comment. When asked about hostages in Gaza, they said: “We continue to stand up for Palestinian liberation and will not stop until it is met.” No scrutiny or context was provided, almost as if the journalists agree with their belief that kidnapping innocent Israelis is a legitimate tactic.
In the aforementioned article about student experiences related to the Israel-Palestine conflict, a poll about student sentiment was supposedly conducted. I serve on the committees of both the Israel Society and the Jewish Society on campus, neither of which was asked to participate. Furthermore, all results were presented in large increments—25% or 50%—hinting at a questionable sample size. No information about the methodology of the poll or which groups were consulted was offered.
Student newspapers have a vital role to play in shaping fair and informed campus conversations. But when it comes to Israel, too many have fallen into patterns of exclusion and unchecked bias. Cases like The McGill Daily’s refusal to publish articles “supportive of Zionism,” or The Harvard Crimson’s support of BDS show that this is not accidental, but a deliberate failure to foster fair, informed campus discussions on complex issues like Israel.
To restore trust and promote genuine dialogue, these papers must recommit to basic principles of journalism: clearly distinguishing opinion from news; fact-checking claims, especially serious accusations; providing context and scrutiny to all sides; and offering a timely right of reply to those targeted. Taking even a few of these steps could drastically improve the fairness and accuracy of student newspapers, fostering a healthier and more open campus debate.
Image: Newspapers. Credit: brotiN biswaS/Pexels
