A recent Israel National News (INN) article accused the United Nations Correspondents Association (UNCA) of hosting an anti-Israel screening of a flotilla video without giving Israel a fair chance at responding. The UNCA complained that INN did not have all the facts – but the extra facts that the UNCA provided do not change the overall picture, nor do they address some of the key points.
The original article stated that UNCA screened a film, by activist Yara Lee, “that purported to show Israel attacking innocent activists. An Israeli request to show a second film that would put the events of the first in a more accurate light was originally granted, then denied at the last minute.”
The anti-Israel film showed Israeli troops preparing to board the activists’ boat, which turned out to be laden not with humanitarian supplies but with terror activists, knives, iron rods and other weapons. The film then switches to scenes of passengers treating the Turkish wounded – skipping over the activists’ violence and attempted lynching of the IDF soldiers.
The UNCA wrote to INN that the story as written was “inaccurate,” and sent INN an “exchange of emails with the Israeli mission that proves UNCA never turned down [Israel’s request] to show an IDF film of the flotilla, but that it was in fact the Israeli spokeswoman who rejected UNCA's offers to show [Israel's] film because she was too ‘exhausted’ that day.”
In fact, however, the email correspondence - which took place shortly before the screening - shows nothing about the cancellation just two hours before the event. It also does not back up the accusations that anyone in the Israeli mission was too “exhausted” to show the film. Instead, the correspondence shows that UNCA back-tracked on its last-minute cancellation by offering to show the Israeli film only after the Q-and-A session with the anti-Israel producer of the first clip.
This offer was not acceptable to Israel, and the spokeswoman insisted that it must be shown immediately after the anti-Israel film, before questions and answers, in order to give it maximum exposure in the fairest way.
Israeli spokeswoman Mirit Cohen explained that all she wanted was “five minutes” after the first film “as a comment.” The UNCA representative responded by ignoring this request, and offering to show the Israeli film ten minutes before the correspondents were scheduled to arrive! He wrote this at 2:15 PM, one hour and 45 minutes before the showing, and offered to “send out an email now to all UNCA members” to inform them of the change. Ignoring the sparse attendance that could be expected, he added, “The advantage is that you would get the first word.”
He then wrote, “We would like to repeat our request that you take questions,” and explained why it was important - implying that Cohen was reluctant to do so. In fact, however, the email correspondence shows that she had offered not to take questions immediately after the screening only in order to save time.
Mirit’s next response was polite, under the circumstances. “Thanks, Giampaolo,” she wrote to UNCA President Giampaolo Pioli. “But I have to admit that I am exhausted from all this process and we won't take part at this one-sided event. Thank you anyway and I do hope for a better cooperation in the future.”
When the Israeli delegation later wrote a letter of protest against the UNCA, the UNCA’s response was sharp. Emphasizing that his organization had no intention of apologizing, Pioli wrote to Mirit Cohen, “… it was you who turned down our offer to screen your Israeli film and make your statement directly before or after Ms. Lee's presentation, you who refused to take the stage alongside Ms. Lee to present your side of the story, you who declined to take questions from UNCA journalists -- a requirement for all UNCA presentations. What was your reason for turning down our offers? You were tired out by our discussions during which you raised your voice with me and rejected all of our proposals for how you could participate. As you put it in your email: "I have to admit that I am exhausted from all this process and we won't take part at this one sided event.' ... Your approach to our organization was both undignified and unprofessional. If anyone is owed an apology it is the United Nations Correspondents Association."
INN wrote to the UNCA asking questions raised by the above points. No response has been received, nearly 24 hours later.
In light of the above, INN stands by its original story. Furthermore, INN expresses wonder at how UNCA could, in its email responses, a) so grossly misinterpret Ms. Cohen’s statements, especially regarding her "exhaustion," and b) describing its approach to the Israeli delegation - including an abrupt, late cancellation followed by a "consolation prize” of showing the film either before the correspondents arrived or after they were likely to have left or otherwise formed strong opinions – by saying, “We wanted a balanced event but you were not willing to take part in one.”