noahidelaws
09-25-2005, 03:56 AM
IDF, media fighting battle of words
Arieh O'Sullivan Jul. 22, 2004
There is a war going on between the IDF Spokesman and military reporters and its ammunition has produced a new language of hints and insinuation. It is an idiosyncratic and indigenous dialect that has grown out of a need to respect the traditional cult of security and censorship as it clashes with the age of modern mass communications.
Take this week's Hizbullah sniper attack along the Lebanon border that killed two soldiers. The gentleman's agreement with the IDF Spokesman that families should not hear of their fallen loved ones from the media is being habitually eroded.
When radio correspondents speak of "heavy exchanges of fire," along the Lebanon front, for example, and it doesn't end with the calming "there were no casualties to our forces," then it means that we have casualties.
When the media speaks of a "difficult incident," one should read: there is at least one person killed if not more. And when the radio cites that an "Israeli" was hurt and not "Israeli civilians" it means that they were soldiers.
These code words had usually been reserved for the electronic Israeli media. The printed media didn't have to deal with this since there was one deadline and casualty announcements were usually released by then. But that changed with the rise of the free-for-all Internet, not to mention SMS text messaging that circumvents the censor.
"As a journalist, I have a problem with these evasive situations when you have information and withhold it," says Alon Ben-David, military reporter for Channel 10, was quoted as saying the media magazine The Seventh Eye. "There is a problem with my obligation to the viewers. If there is an incident and I don't report it then I am failing in my job."
The IDF Spokeswoman Brig.-Gen. Ruth Yaron has proven powerless in getting the competitive Internet sites to conform with the gentleman's agreements. When the cell of military reporters numbered only a dozen with decades of experience between them the IDF embraced it with background briefings, interviews and access to top brass. But in the past couple of years the group has expanded to over 30 with many inexperienced yet ambitious reporters from Internet sites. It's mushroomed so much the IDF has virtually ceased dealing with the group as a whole. And this further exasperates the competition and, ironically, diminished the IDF's Spokesman's own role.
In fact, the institution of the IDF Spokesman itself is becoming something of a joke and its announcements, once accepted as credible, are increasingly ludicrous.
Take for example army statements, nearly daily, that IDF and Shin Bet have captured the top commander of the Hamas/Islamic Jihad/Tanzim in Nablus/Jenin/Tulkarum/Hebron. And they all seem to have been connected to the bombing of the Maxim restaurant in Haifa or other major terrorist attack.
Praise must be given where praise is due and the Shin Bet and troops on the ground are doing a magnificent job cracking down on Palestinian terror. But how "senior" can many of these guys be when they were born in the 1980s?
And another thing. After every unfortunate accident/incident the IDF Spokesman responds that the army has immediately launched an investigation. This is code meaning that the army has no idea what happened. What better way to head off uncomfortable questions than to open an inquiry? It helps project an image of a serious organization that relentlessly examines itself.
But the code words and army gibberish is not only confined to the media. The IDF brass has had a great impact on the lexicon of reporters and government leaders today.
Following are some common expressions and euphemisms and their interpretation:
BARREL THAT HAS A BOTTOM (ha'chavit im tach'######) – Shin Bet chief Avi Dicther used this term recently when he said that, contrary to popular opinion and military convention, terrorism was not an endless pit and there was a limited supply of terrorists, and murderers.
HEIGHT OF THE FLAMES (gova ha'lehavot) – the frequency and intensity of shooting incidents, explosions and other terror acts during the armed struggle. The height is the intensity of the attacks or the frequency, or both.
LOW SIGNATURE (hatima nemucha) – originally a radar term, this generally means actions taken by the security apparatus against enemy targets without public knowledge, most importantly without the awareness of the media. Successful operations are considered ones which never become public knowledge since instilling public fear is a major goal of terrorism.
PRESSURE LEVERAGES (manofeh la'hatz) – Israel uses these to reduce Palestinian violence. There are three main types of leverages: military, economic and physical movement restrictions. They can be used individually or simultaneously. There are a number of economic leverages such as withholding tax payments or preventing the entry of Palestinian laborers.
STRING OF EXPLOSIVE CHARGES (zirat mitanim) – a series of explosive charges deployed in a small area meant to explode at once when one is detonated.
PAINTED SUPPORT (siu'a tzavu'a) this is support or aid coming from a source clearly meant to be seen. It is marked so the rest of the world knows who is the giver and who is the receiver. Iraq has been a master of painted support, doling out millions to the families of Palestinians killed or injured in the five months of clashes.
DETONATION CHAIN REACTION (gal niputz) – This is the concept where unrest and clashes in one venue spread to others and may encompass an entire region. The Palestinian strategy is to get the conflict here to spread to the northern border with Syria and Lebanon and possibly draw regional action and international intervention.
Comments:
1) The Rebbe spoke often about how the government hushes up incidents of soldiers and civilians being murdered or wounded, lest people realise the emptiness of the "peace" agreements, and the fact that the enemy hasn't stuck to the conditions of the agreement, and we continue to foolishly stick to ours, for fear of arousing the disapproval of the international "community." The fact is that no matter how much the gov't hushes it up, the arabs know how many people they killed, and when they feel they got away with it, that strengthens them to commit more murders r"l hy"d.
2) Concerning euphemisms: this is a very easy trap to fall into. We must say expulsion, not disengagement. Cowardly retreat, not withdrawal. Surrender and flight, not pullout. Using the leftist terms acknowledges the anti-Torah premises underlying those terms.
Arieh O'Sullivan Jul. 22, 2004
There is a war going on between the IDF Spokesman and military reporters and its ammunition has produced a new language of hints and insinuation. It is an idiosyncratic and indigenous dialect that has grown out of a need to respect the traditional cult of security and censorship as it clashes with the age of modern mass communications.
Take this week's Hizbullah sniper attack along the Lebanon border that killed two soldiers. The gentleman's agreement with the IDF Spokesman that families should not hear of their fallen loved ones from the media is being habitually eroded.
When radio correspondents speak of "heavy exchanges of fire," along the Lebanon front, for example, and it doesn't end with the calming "there were no casualties to our forces," then it means that we have casualties.
When the media speaks of a "difficult incident," one should read: there is at least one person killed if not more. And when the radio cites that an "Israeli" was hurt and not "Israeli civilians" it means that they were soldiers.
These code words had usually been reserved for the electronic Israeli media. The printed media didn't have to deal with this since there was one deadline and casualty announcements were usually released by then. But that changed with the rise of the free-for-all Internet, not to mention SMS text messaging that circumvents the censor.
"As a journalist, I have a problem with these evasive situations when you have information and withhold it," says Alon Ben-David, military reporter for Channel 10, was quoted as saying the media magazine The Seventh Eye. "There is a problem with my obligation to the viewers. If there is an incident and I don't report it then I am failing in my job."
The IDF Spokeswoman Brig.-Gen. Ruth Yaron has proven powerless in getting the competitive Internet sites to conform with the gentleman's agreements. When the cell of military reporters numbered only a dozen with decades of experience between them the IDF embraced it with background briefings, interviews and access to top brass. But in the past couple of years the group has expanded to over 30 with many inexperienced yet ambitious reporters from Internet sites. It's mushroomed so much the IDF has virtually ceased dealing with the group as a whole. And this further exasperates the competition and, ironically, diminished the IDF's Spokesman's own role.
In fact, the institution of the IDF Spokesman itself is becoming something of a joke and its announcements, once accepted as credible, are increasingly ludicrous.
Take for example army statements, nearly daily, that IDF and Shin Bet have captured the top commander of the Hamas/Islamic Jihad/Tanzim in Nablus/Jenin/Tulkarum/Hebron. And they all seem to have been connected to the bombing of the Maxim restaurant in Haifa or other major terrorist attack.
Praise must be given where praise is due and the Shin Bet and troops on the ground are doing a magnificent job cracking down on Palestinian terror. But how "senior" can many of these guys be when they were born in the 1980s?
And another thing. After every unfortunate accident/incident the IDF Spokesman responds that the army has immediately launched an investigation. This is code meaning that the army has no idea what happened. What better way to head off uncomfortable questions than to open an inquiry? It helps project an image of a serious organization that relentlessly examines itself.
But the code words and army gibberish is not only confined to the media. The IDF brass has had a great impact on the lexicon of reporters and government leaders today.
Following are some common expressions and euphemisms and their interpretation:
BARREL THAT HAS A BOTTOM (ha'chavit im tach'######) – Shin Bet chief Avi Dicther used this term recently when he said that, contrary to popular opinion and military convention, terrorism was not an endless pit and there was a limited supply of terrorists, and murderers.
HEIGHT OF THE FLAMES (gova ha'lehavot) – the frequency and intensity of shooting incidents, explosions and other terror acts during the armed struggle. The height is the intensity of the attacks or the frequency, or both.
LOW SIGNATURE (hatima nemucha) – originally a radar term, this generally means actions taken by the security apparatus against enemy targets without public knowledge, most importantly without the awareness of the media. Successful operations are considered ones which never become public knowledge since instilling public fear is a major goal of terrorism.
PRESSURE LEVERAGES (manofeh la'hatz) – Israel uses these to reduce Palestinian violence. There are three main types of leverages: military, economic and physical movement restrictions. They can be used individually or simultaneously. There are a number of economic leverages such as withholding tax payments or preventing the entry of Palestinian laborers.
STRING OF EXPLOSIVE CHARGES (zirat mitanim) – a series of explosive charges deployed in a small area meant to explode at once when one is detonated.
PAINTED SUPPORT (siu'a tzavu'a) this is support or aid coming from a source clearly meant to be seen. It is marked so the rest of the world knows who is the giver and who is the receiver. Iraq has been a master of painted support, doling out millions to the families of Palestinians killed or injured in the five months of clashes.
DETONATION CHAIN REACTION (gal niputz) – This is the concept where unrest and clashes in one venue spread to others and may encompass an entire region. The Palestinian strategy is to get the conflict here to spread to the northern border with Syria and Lebanon and possibly draw regional action and international intervention.
Comments:
1) The Rebbe spoke often about how the government hushes up incidents of soldiers and civilians being murdered or wounded, lest people realise the emptiness of the "peace" agreements, and the fact that the enemy hasn't stuck to the conditions of the agreement, and we continue to foolishly stick to ours, for fear of arousing the disapproval of the international "community." The fact is that no matter how much the gov't hushes it up, the arabs know how many people they killed, and when they feel they got away with it, that strengthens them to commit more murders r"l hy"d.
2) Concerning euphemisms: this is a very easy trap to fall into. We must say expulsion, not disengagement. Cowardly retreat, not withdrawal. Surrender and flight, not pullout. Using the leftist terms acknowledges the anti-Torah premises underlying those terms.