Fauxtography and False Reporting: Blurring the Line Between Fact and Fiction

This month saw a fresh outburst of violence in Gaza between Israeli and Palestinian communities. In a recent Jerusalem Post article, Herb Keinon outlines how photos of death and destruction attributed to the conflict set into motion an online war paralleling the real-life hostilities in the region. 

Badawi's March 10 Twitter post

Outrage erupted on March 10 when United Nations Office for the Coordination of Human Affairs (OCHA) officer Khulood Badawi tweeted a tragic image of a severely injured Palestinian child, claiming her to be "another child killed by Israel." Referring to the ongoing conflict in Gaza, Badawi's caption makes it appear as though young Rajaa Abu Shaban was the latest casualty. The image rapidly circulated the internet and ascended to the top tweet of the day with relation to Gaza.

In less than five hours, though, fellow Twitter user Avi Mayer refuted Badawi's representation of the image, having discovered the existence of the photo dating back as far as 2006. Reuters (the source of the image) confirmed this.

OCHA's advocacy has been uniquely charged with promoting the rights of those individuals affected by humanitarian crises (including unresolved conflict) and "coordinating international humanitarian response," including communication through social media. However, many have criticized the way in which Badawi went about doing so. Posting an image (particularly one so solemn) from an unchecked source and attributing it to a UN member country carries a high degree of risk. Israeli ambassador to the UN Ron Prosor explains, "such actions contribute to incitement, conflict and, ultimately, violence."

Ron Prosor

Indeed, the resulting consequences of these falsely attributed images are not contained to the virtual world in which they were posted. The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) responded quickly to the inaccuracy; subsequently the pro-Israel watchdog organization Honest Reporting re-posted and covered the issue extensively. The response doesn't stop there; high-level political figures have entered into the heated debate as well. Ron Prosor, Israeli ambassador to the UN, has formally requested Badawi's immediate termination from her post at OCHA. Prosor grounds his argument in articles 100 and 101 of the UN Charter, of which he posits that Badawi is in clear violation.

A period of silence from the UN followed Prosor's request, causing some backlash among supporters of Israel expecting the international body to treat this issue with urgency. When a representative of OCHA departs so starkly from the organizations' standards of accountability and neutrality, argues Prosor, "the integrity of the entire organization is eroded."

"The credibility of OCHA is already seriously in doubt among the Israeli public. This is why immediate action in this case is necessary.”

Fox News obtained UN Under-Secretary General Amos letter of response, in which she expressed regret "that an OCHA staff member has posted information on her personal Twitter profile, which is both false and which reflects on issues that are related to her work. The opinions expressed in her tweets in no way reflect the views of OCHA, nor has it been sanctioned by OCHA."

While many have attacked Badawi for her actions, she is not without supporters. Some organizations  have spoken out in defense of her right to free speech. Alternative News has launched an online petition backing Badawi's continued employment with OCHA. New York Times blogger Robert Mackey chastised the IDF for launching a "campaign" against pro-Palestinian bloggers who he feels unknowingly misrepresented the image in question. Badawi herself addressed the issue on her Twitter page with a brief correction, reminding readers that the account is personal and is distinctly separate from her professional identity.

As for the opposing petitions pressuring the UN to either retain or dismiss Khulood Badawi as an employee, a followup article by Herb Keinon posits the outcome is uncertain. Fox News reports that Badawi remains employed by the United Nations although she will undergo an internal investigation as confirmed by UN spokeswoman Amanda Pitt.

When evaluating reliability and bias with regard to this issue, it's crucial to note that many of these sources are blatantly partisan. These are best exemplified by sites like Badawi's Twitter page, dubbed "Long Live Palestine," or the Honest Reporting organization, who is dedicated to "defending Israel from media bias." In comparison, Herb Keinon's Jerusalem Post article entitled, "Israel: Fire UN Official Over False Gaza Photo" remains highly objective in its discussion of the issue, considering he is writing for a clearly pro-Israel newspaper and thus is likely to be similarly aligned.The article perhaps lacks evidence of the opinions that oppose Prosor's "outrage," however the author maintains the degree of separation between the issue and his opinion and strengthens his credibility. Badawi's objectivity is compromised by extremely strong political leanings; in his request for dismissal to the UN, Ambassador Prosor cited her history of pro-Palestinian activism. Given Badawi's position at the United Nations, some argue this is an unacceptable conflict of interest that compromises her potential as a credible source of information.

Attempting to identify the intent (or lack of it) in Badawi's post may be futile given the abundance of contrasting interpretations. Many who support Israel feel this image to be representative of an intentional vilification of Israel, while supporters of the Palestinian cause feel Israel is ruthlessly attacking accidental misappropriations. Bias steeped in cultural pride and a strong nationalistic sentiments exist on both sides of the debate; achieving a real, objective understanding of this issue even from credible sources proves difficult in the face of this.  Nonetheless, it's certain that this situation has reiterated the importance of ensuring source credibility, as fauxtography (in its various forms) and falsified reporting are not unfamiliar methods of warfare.

Sanctity or Sin? Gur Hasidism and Sexual Separation

The Jewish people are known for being a religious community of many opinions; the Talmud itself is expressed in the form of an ongoing debate with regard to a variety of dilemmas. It’s not surprising, then, that this expansive range of beliefs is accompanied by differing expressions and practices of faith. While it is relatively well known that rigorous lifestyle choices are undertaken by those who practice Orthodox Judaism, understanding some seemingly extreme behaviors can be difficult for outsiders. This is particularly true when studying the religious practices of the Gur Hasidim, a Hasidic sect of Judaism that prides itself on a commitment to sanctity (or kedusha). 

Gur Hasidism is known for being a highly secretive sect of Hasidic Judaism, but a recent study outlined in this Haaretz article sheds light on the inner workings of Gur Hasidic life. Sanctity to the Gur Hasidic Jew is a practice of "drawing apart," according to author and former Gur Hasidim community member Tamar Rotem; this concept is exemplified best by the guidelines for male-female relations...or lack thereof. The idea of prishut, or separation, guides the interactions of men and women; sexuality is considered incongruous with the spiritual mission of Hasidism. Wasserman explains,

"There is a rivalry between spirituality and sexuality, so sexuality has to be abolished."

Having studied the sect while writing her dissertation, Dr. Nava Wasserman has in many ways demystified the life of Gur Hasidic Jews, revealing the full extent of these separation practices (this is particularly notable, as kedusha is an oral tradition in Gur Hasidism). For example, both men and women are expected to dress very modestly; men may not have a conversation without donning their overcoat! Perhaps more indicative of the asexual nature prescribed by Gur Hasidic culture is the fact that men avert their eyes from women so as not to be overcome with feelings of lust, or "lewd thoughts." While in more secular cultures weddings are commonly considered a prime spot to find a date these days, the Gur Hasidic tradition prohibits men from attending weddings in part to limit exposure to women.

One might assume that relations between husband and wives are exempt from these types of separation practices, but in fact spouses deal with some of most stringent standards. In public, husband and wife do not walk in the street together; privately, husbands address their wives not by name but with a hum or rap on the table. Dinner is often eaten at separate tables. Touch is extraordinarily limited, as Gur Hasidic couples behave as the woman were ritually impure throughout the month. In order to understand why these separation practices are observed, it's necessary to refer back to the concepts of sanctity and "distant closeness" that Rotem and Wasserman describe. According to Dr. Wasserman, the foundation of the Gur Hasidic faith is that one should "remove yourself from those things that are permitted to you."

The trickiest part of marriage for Gur Hasidic couples must be sex. As Rotem points out, sexuality is prevalent in western society; most American men don't think anything of bestowing a loving touch or kiss upon their wives either publicly or privately; dirty jokes make the office email rounds; even cars utilize powers of seduction. Under the tenets of sanctity and prishut, however, couples must channel their sexuality into a purely procreational activity. In another article by Rotem, a woman recalls her wedding night: she was expected not to focus on the pleasure of conjugal relations with her husband but instead to visualize the face of the Rebbe in order to produce "righteous children." Navigating marital relations is a delicate task regardless of faith, but is made even more difficult by this sexually averse lifestyle of the Gur Hasidim, who are largely unaware of sex in general until the wedding day itself. Quite understandably, some men faint or vomit at the daunting events ahead of them (for which they were entirely unprepared)!

Author Tamar Rotem has written several articles on the topic of Gur Hasidism. After reviewing many of them, she clearly brings in several points of view on the matter. The two articles by Rotem mentioned in this post discuss opposing viewpoints; she openly acknowledges that some felt Wasserman's work was "imprecise" in its depiction of Gur Hasidism and subsequently wrote an article giving alternate opinions a voice. While she utilizes restraint and is respectful of other perceptions, Rotem clearly wishes to bring this very private sect of Judaism (and its unusual marital framework) into the light. As former member of the community, one can qualify her as authoritative in the field due to personal experience. Her articles often include the testimony of former Gur Hasidism women who left the faith, suggesting she may empathize with their plight and wish to make a difference.

Dr. Nava Wasserman is social worker who obtained her doctorate at Bar-Ilan University; her study portrays Gur society, in her words, as "a success." Given her extensive study she can be considered a reliable source of factual information about the Gur Hasidic sect, however she admittedly has not experienced the life itself. Clearly this difference in experience in some way contributes to the stark difference in the opinions of Dr. Wasserman and those of former Gur Hasidic women interviewed by Rotem.

Gur Hasidism is an area of Judaism yet to be fully explored and understood from an outsider's perspective. Personal opinions on the practices of the community are clearly varied, though these beliefs and their implementation are nonetheless highly intriguing.