And that’s the way it is!
One of the features of the home I grew up in was sitting down in front of the TV to watch the nightly news. Some of my earliest memories are of news anchor Walter Cronkite signing off the end of his program with “And that’s the way it is…” (and then he would give the day and date).
And that’s the way it is.
I was raised in a world where those who reported the news held that assignment as a sacred trust. Was there unconscious bias? Of course. As Daniel Khaneman suggests in his book Thinking Fast and Slow, that’s just part of human nature, and “experts” are especially prone to unconscious bias.[1]
But most of us understood our social contract with the news included journalists who at least attempted to report the facts in an unbiased way as possible and they had editors keeping them accountable to do so.
Fast forward to today. I don’t think anyone believes the news is unbiased anymore. Though various news outlets will still claim a lack of bias, I can almost discern a wink and a nod as they do.
In 2024, if you want to get closer to the truth of current events, you have to do some digging and make sure you read deeply on all sides of an issue before coming to a conclusion, and even then, you may not be seeing how it really is.
All that brings me to the book The Palestinian-Israeli conflict: A Very Short Introduction by Martin Bunton.[2]
This book that is part of the Short Introduction series by Oxford University Press purports to tell us “The way it is” regarding an incredibly complex political-historical-cultural-social-religious quagmire. In 114 (admittedly dense) pages, Bunton paints what he feels is a rather black and white picture of a situation that seems to me to be full of every shade of grey imaginable.
Case in point—He chooses to end his book with the following quote from former Prime Minister of Israel, Ehud Barak: “If, and as long as between the Jordan and the sea, there is only one political entity named Israel, it will end up being either non-Jewish or non-democratic…if the Palestinians vote in elections, it is a binational state, and if they don’t, it is an apartheid state.” [3]
In Bunton’s telling, that’s just the way it is.
This book was a compelling read for me. Long before the recent events of October 7 that turned the attention of the world to this region, I’ve had an interest in ancient Biblical history, and early-on that interest extended to the history of modern Israel; the what’s, when’s, why’s, who’s, and how’s of the formation of current day Israel and Palestine. Because of that, I was familiar with most of the “plot points” of the story Bunton is telling here but still, I appreciated the concise way in which it was told (and I was reminded of some of the “plot” I had forgotten along the way).
However, from the start of the book I noticed what seemed like a slight bias. Bunton isn’t deaf to Jewish concerns, but he largely frames the struggle with an oppressor/oppressed—or a colonization— perspective. While he is clearly not advocating for the erasure of the state of Israel, he does seem to place the majority of the burden of the conflict on Jewish activity, and in my mind, minimizes both Jewish motivation and Arab actions. In fact, probably what I grew to understand most after reading this book was a better grasp of the Palestinian position regarding this long struggle.
As Ari Blaff in The Tel Aviv review of books points out: “… the value of Martin Bunton’s book lies in revealing a relatively moderate aspect of pro-Palestinian attitudes within academia today. Although Bunton’s ability to condense the conflict’s history in under one-hundred-and-fifty pages (maps and indexes included) is impressive, few will leave his study with a contextual understanding of the Zionist point of view.”[4]
To Bunton’s credit, I do appreciate the robust reading list found at the end of the book for those who want to dig deeper. I did a cursory review of the material, and it seemed there were voices from multiple sides represented in that list.
I think a book that embraced multiple voices in the text itself might be a more effective way to wrestle through this issue. For instance, a book like Teaching the Israeli-Arab Conflict [5] explores the nature of the challenges through diverse voices and divergent disciplines. However, that book doesn’t tell the concise and focused historical narrative, which, in spite of its other flaws, Bunton’s book does quite well.
My approach to navigating the Middle East conflict is to read and pay attention to as many competing perspectives as I can, and then try to work out the conflict in reporting. In the end, I’ve come to anticipate that most reporting is going to, as Emily Dickerson suggested, “tell the truth but tell it slant.” [6] And though I can wish for the old days, when writers and reporters told us “That’s the way it is”, even back then, there was a burden of follow-up and verification, which is a much easier task today with the ready availability of resources through the internet.
Because even when, and maybe especially when, someone is an expert they may not recognize their own bias that causes them to not fully appreciate the way something actually is.
[1] Kahneman, Daniel, Thinking, Fast and Slow. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2011.
[2] Martin Bunton, The Palestinian-Israeli Conflict; A Very Short Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013.
[3] Bunton, The Palestinian-Israeli Conflict, 2013, Page 114.
[4] Ari Blaff, Teaching the Conflict, The Tel Aviv Review of Books, Spring 2020.
[5] Teaching the Israeli-Arab Conflict, Ed. Rachael S. Harris, Wayne State University Press, Detroit, MI, 2019.
[6] The Poems of Emily Dickinson: Reading Edition, The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1998.
About the Author
Tim Clark
I'm on a lifelong journey of discovering the person God has created me to be and aligning that with the purpose God has created me for. I've been pressing hard after Jesus for 40 years, and I currently serve Him as the lead pastor of vision and voice at The Church On The Way in Los Angeles. I live with my wife and 3 kids in Burbank California.17 responses to “And that’s the way it is!”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Tim, this is a really nicely written post. I admit that my knee-jerk reaction to this whole topic is more along the lines of Bunton’s “oppressor-oppressed” interpretation, so I needed your gentle reminder to listen to both sides. I admire the way you do that well.
Thanks Kim. I wrote it before I knew we were being provided prompts, so in trying to throw in the answers to those prompts after the fact, I feared I’d messed it up!
I totally get the knee-jerk reaction you have. If I wasn’t so deeply versed in this conflict and history I’d have it too… in fact, even grasping and largely agreeing with the Zionist point of view, I still have grave concerns about the treatment of the Palestinian people.
Like you said, it’s vital to listen to both sides.
Great post, Tim. I do remember Cronkite’s “And that’s the way it is,” but barely. Ha! Your discussion of media makes me think of another unconscious bias — mine. I mean, I think I view each media/news outlet, and the way each approaches their reporting on the affairs of Israel and the Middle East, through a pretty binary lens. Like — each is either right or left. A few years ago, it seemed easier to categorize the legacy institutions of Fox News and CNN as conservative vs. liberal. Today, there are a million options to choose from, but I still think the way I view the options is through a conservative/liberal grid. It’s got to be one or the other, whether it’s the BBC, The Times of Israel, or even Christianity Today. Have you come across media that seems to be “objective” (I know, even saying that I know no single perspective is completely objective) in their reporting, or perhaps more objective than not?
Thanks Travis. Great question. I really can’t think of a single media outlet that I would consider as unbiased. I think that’s good in a way because it helps us always be cautious to buy something hook, line and sinker. I do, however, wish there were less media options, it would be great to only have to weigh 10 voices as opposed to the thousands we are exposed to every day.
Hi Tim,
Your title reminded me of a song. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cOeKidp-iWo
Bruce Hornsby and the Range – The Way it is.
I am listening to it now.
Just the way it is a philosophy that leaves us hanging. But Bruce (the singer) adds in “but don’t you believe it.”
Ahhh a ray of hope.
In my external research I found…
“Allah the Almighty has not used the word “يَمْلِکھَا” [in the aforementioned verse] but in fact said “يَرِثُھَا”. This manifestly shows that the true heirs [of Palestine] will always be Muslims, and if it goes into the hands of some else at some point, such a possession would be similar to a scenario in which the mortgagor gives temporary control of their property to the mortgagee. This is the glory of Divine revelation, [and it shall surely come to pass].” (Al Hakam, 10 November 1902, p. 7)
Jenny Dooley reminded me of Fukuyama’s Identity book and how religion is a core element of the identity for Palestinians and Jews.
Bunton’s book has a blind spot in this regard.
I was reading Joel in DLGP03 and he has some real experience in working world reconciliation issues. It worthy of a quick review.
For me? I am joining Cathy Glei in praying…the most simple yet effective thing I can do for the middle east.
Shalom….
Agreed that this book has a major blind spot regarding the role that religious identity plays in this conflict.
And also agreed that prayer is the first and most important thing we can do about this.
And I appreciate the ray of hope you offered. I never want to simply look at something this broken and say “well, that’s just the way it is”.
You’ve got me thinking that in our pre-internet glory days news wasn’t as unbiased as we like to think it was. Instead, the “burden of follow-up and verification” was too great for many of us to do it. Yet, even with the internet, it is perhaps becoming more difficult to follow-up and verify as algorithms and AI become more intelligent about what we want to see and hear.
The algorithms are a problem. It’s also just too dang overwhelming to verify with the cacophony of voices out there. Even though we have the tools to vet the stories, it’s easier to find a handful of media voices you mostly trust and just kind of go with it.
I wish it wasn’t so. I’m challenging myself with this reading and blog to do a better job listening to multiple viewpoints and checking them against truth.
This is a very balanced and comprehensive (to the degree that anyone is able to be comprehensive in under 1000 words!) post Tim. Thank you.
Your title: “And that’s the way it is” – I recognized that famous saying, but even more so, it struck me as being “fatalistic” and “oh, well, nothing will ever change, that’s just the way it is.”
Sadly, that’s a common sentiment among many observers. It’s a situation that appears to not be changeable. Insert shoulder shrug and eye roll.
Your comments regarding “bias” might be at the core of that sense. Our implicit biases, sadly, leave us stuck in our way of thinking, with little hope for change and forward progress. Lord help us, everyone.
John, you hit the nail on the head. That’s what my concern is. That we form an opinion based on something we hear or have heard that sounds good and then develop an unconscious bias without ever testing that bias with alternative information.
I think of both the college students protesting and shouting ‘from the river to the sea’ (do they know which river and which sea, and what that really means for Jews?) but I also think of some folks who equate Palestinian people with animals and preach that Israel has the absolute right to do anything because of a Biblical mandate.
Maybe we need to be “slow to speak and quick to listen”.
Yes, even despite our best intentions, there are always going to be 2 (or 3, or 50) sides to a story, and it seems like those stories grow more convoluted and contradictory as time goes on. I appreciate your encouragement to keep listening to diverse voices. I received most of my information about events happening after the Old Testament in my History classes at Fox, which gave me an odd, Christian pacifist/Palestinian bent that I think needs to be tempered by more of the Israeli perspective… Thanks for the nudge to dig deeper there.
I’m the opposite; I got most of my modern Middle East history filtered through Israeli zionists or supporters who see their story through a very strong viewpoint. I’m not tossing all that, but I am often looking for Palestinian perspective that recognizes historical reality but suggests alternative solutions to those I have been quick to embrace.
Tim, your post hit a really hard spot! Fake news. How do we know the truth in the midst of all of this cellophane news? How we see the news, what news we choose to see and then verifying it. Trust but verify, wasn’t that a Brene word? Thank you for your post and telling of your journey in all of this.
Cellophane news. Never heard that phrase but now I’ll use it liberally.
And I think I’ve gotten to the place with news that I’ve switched the approach from “trust but verify” to “verify then trust”. It’s sad but it’s our reality.
Thanks for a thought revoking response!
What a great post man. You engaged our reading at a high level, way to set the standard!
I agree, there is always a slant to the truth or our truth. I was having a debate / discussion last week with a friend about “is the world getting worse?” and I had to admit that I am more optimistic and idealistic as an ENFJ by nature. I know this influences my interpretations and research so, like you said, its important to seek out differing views to find some kind of truth and accuracy out there. Enjoyed your post!
Thanks Adam! I hadn’t considered that not only do we have to look at all sides of ‘reporting’ but also personality. That’s a great observation.
Hi Tim!
I like your approach to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. However, perhaps we also need to be aware of the potential bias of any source so that we don’t get caught up in any one person’s interests. In your view, to what extent does media reporting, whether biased or honest, affect the peace process between the two countries?