[The following, by Eamonn McDonagh, is crossposted from Z Word.]

1. Introduction

The purpose of this piece is to compare some aspects of the coverage of the recent diplomatic tension between the United States and Israel arising from Israel's announcement of its intention to build new homes in a disputed part of Jerusalem during the recent visit to Israel of United States Vice President Joe Biden. The Guardian, of London and El País, of Madrid were the newspapers chosen for examination because they are usually regarded as leaders in the advocacy of liberal and progressive politics in their respective countries and progressive and liberal opinion in some democratic nations has in recent years taken a sharp turn against Israel. Putting it very roughly, when Israel was frequently involved in large-scale conventional warfare and expanding the territory under its control it was generally seen in sympathetic terms. Now that it has withdrawn from huge extensions of territory conquered in war, made comprehensive peace deals with two of countries that border it and abandoned fantasies of remaking the map of the Middle East to suit its proposes, it is increasingly seen as a uniquely evil state, illegitimate from birth, perverse in its policies, cruel in its behavior and ruled by a nefarious ideology, Zionism.

A detailed consideration of how this change came about lies beyond the scope of this essay. What I will seek to do instead is offer a close reading of two editorials and a number of other articles in which I will examine not only the explicit argument being offered but also look at the choices of a word, metaphors and comparisons and reflect on their resonances, associations and history. That's one way of getting at what writers really feel, what discourse is speaking through them, as well as how they recount the broader narrative. It may also server to illuminate some of the contours of progressive opinion on the Israel-Palestine conflict in the two countries.

Before proceeding to this examination I'll first take a brief look at two newspapers concerned and their role in the respective societies. I'll then set down the facts of the Biden in Jerusalem affair before finally turning to the texts in question.

2. El País and The Guardian

El País was founded in 1976, a few months after the death of the dictator Francisco Franco. It quickly established itself a role for itself as a key media voice in favor of the transformation of the Francoist state into a liberal European democracy. It particularly distinguished itself during the attempted coup of the 23rd of February, 1981. While the success or failure of the coup was still in doubt it was the only newspaper to put a special edition on the streets condemning the plotters and expressing support for the democratic constitutional order. It is generally supportive of the PSOE, Spain's governing socialist party, and has been particularly firm in its backing of such initiatives as the liberalizing of the abortion law and the introduction of same-sex marriage in Spain. It has also stood by the measures taken by successive Spanish governments to suppress Basque nationalist terrorism.

With regard to questions of foreign affairs, it is probably the Spanish national daily which takes the greatest interest in events outside its country's borders and it has sixteen foreign correspondents. El País supported Spain's entry into NATO and the European Union and is today cautiously supportive of Spain's significant participation in the Afghan conflict. It has in recent years been harshly critical of a number of Latin American governments, especially those of Venezuela, Bolivia and Argentina.

Now owned by the Prisa media group - Spain's biggest - El País is the country's most widely read general daily newspaper with almost 2.1 million readers, more than 700 thousand readers ahead of El Mundo, its nearest rival, and more than triple the readership of the third placed paper, ABC. It's hard to be precise about the readership and influence of El País in Spanish speaking countries outside Spain. It has an excellent and comprehensive online edition almost all of which may be accessed without payment. Writing from Argentina, my own impression is that the chattering classes keep a weather eye on it for what it says about the government here and for the vastly more comprehensive coverage of foreign affairs it offers than the local press. I suspect that the same might be true in other hispanophone countries in Latin America and that it may be read with special assiduity by opponents of the government in countries where press freedom is not all that it might be.

The history of The Guardian will require less explanation here. The newspaper has given its name to a common expression, "Guardian reader". The use of it suggests that the person referred to adheres, wholly or in part, to a constellation of political and social ideas that include hostility to the bulk of the foreign policy of the United States and Great Britain and sees progressive politics not in terms of seeking a greater share of national wealth for the working class and poor at home and the extension of democracy and human rights abroad but rather in the vindication of the rights and the encouragement of the recognition of various social, ethnic and sexual minorities.

Just has El País has generally supported the PSOE The Guardian has usually supported the Labour Party. However, while during much of its life El País has seen itself as having a clear mission, that of supporting the introduction and consolidation of democracy in Spain and its normalization as a European country, The Guardian has lacked any such clear role. Opposition to successive Conservative governments from 1970 to 1993, especially those led by Margaret Thatcher provided it with a certain focus but most of its energies in recent years went into opposing the overthrow of the dictatorship of Saddam Hussein in Iraq and seriously doubting the wisdom of Britain's military involvement in Afghanistan.

The Guardian claims a readership of 1.14 million and to have one of the most widely read newspaper websites in the world. It is owned by the Scott Trust, something that makes it immune from takeover and which the paper claims gives it a uniquely independent voice.

---

This post is the first in a series of four.