UNDERSTANDING
THE GOLDSTONE REPORT

Jeremy Bowen reports on passage of the Goldstone Report in UN, then the anchor interviews him by phone. Although Goldstone had expressed sadness at the one-sidedness of the report the previous day to journalists in Geneva, now he has backtracked completely. The anchor, who seems to know about the earlier remarks, gives Goldstone every opportunity to express his previous attitude, but never embarrasses him with an explicit mention.

Paula Hancocks reports from Ramallah about protests. Camera work when showing "the largest demonstration since the events" is dodgy, and her explanations of events superficial. Too bad she didn't interview Dan Schueftan. Meantime discussion of Abbas as "weak in many eyes" just replicates the dominant honor-shame paradigm in which restraint -- not pushing the Goldstone Report so the Palestinians can get on with the business of building a state for its people -- is viewed not as strength but impotence.

Here's CNN's Fareed Zakaria interviewing Goldstone. Even though it's clear that Zakaria hasn't read the report in question (or even a serious summary) since he let's Goldstone off the hook repeatedly, Goldstone's clearly on his best behavior for a Western public that assumes he's of good will. Highlight: How do these deeds compare with, say, Kosovo? Goldstone: "No comparison." So... why the possibility of "crimes against humanity?"

Christiane Amanpour, who, like Zakaria, has apparently not read the report (or a serious summary), and therefore, like Zakaria, let's Goldstone off the hook for saying silly things about his investigation of Hamas, nonetheless gets some interesting comments from Goldstone: "This wasn't even quasi-judicial, certainly not a judicial hearing." Follow up that wasn't asked: "So why the [harsh] judgments?" For transcript and fisking of second part of interview, see Augean Stables.

Christiane Amanpour interviews former Secretary of State and Ambassador to the UN on the Goldstone Report. Albright is nearly incomprehensible as she tries to navigate between criticizing the report and "respecting" all the players involved in producing it, including the NGOs (good example of the "halo effect").  Amanpour asks leading questions that assume the virtues of the report. Amanpour C-, Albright D-.