Discussion about the Middle East is difficult. Conflicting views are deeply held and even reasonable people struggle to speak, and to listen, dispassionately and with respect.

Publishers have a right to take a position on the issues but also have a responsibility to support informed discussion that is fair and has a degree of balance. I am pleased that P&I has agreed to publish this article, hoping this reflects commitment to contribute responsibly to public interest journalism across all the issues it covers.

Small on-line publications like P&I face challenges in abiding by professional standards for public interest journalism such as the Australian Press Council’s General Principles. But for contributors like me, the publication abiding by some such standards is important.

Which is why I am writing about P&I’s reporting on Middle East issues, particularly the conflict between Israel and Hamas in Gaza, despite not being an expert in this field.

While P&I is not a member of the Australian Press Council, it seems reasonable to assume it would wish to have standards comparable to the APC’s General Principles which member publications are committed to uphold. Central to these are ‘to take reasonable steps to comply’ with the Principles which relate in particular to ‘accuracy and clarity’ and ‘fairness and balance’.

P&I’s business model makes it difficult to meet the APC’s precise Principles under these two headings. The model involves publishing a series of op-eds without any separate presentation of factual material, which is almost certainly inconsistent with the provision under the APC’s first General Principle that factual material should be distinguishable from opinion. The blurring of facts and........

© Pearls and Irritations