|
|
|
Sort Order |
|
|
|
Items / Page
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
113995
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2012.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Jews have figured prominently in the propaganda war aimed at undermining Israel. They have joined in, and at times taken the lead in, branding the Jewish state a pariah nation and seeking to cripple its economy, deprive it of basic rights of self-defence, and challenge its very right to exist. These Jewish attacks on Israel almost invariably entail false, defamatory arguments. Their corrosive impact goes beyond the attacks themselves and entails providing an aura of legitimacy to anti-Israel attacks by non-Jews who seek to buttress their own arguments by citing Jews who make much the same arguments. While there are various reasons why individuals turn against their communities of origin, such alienation and hostility are particularly common within communities under siege. Members of such communities commonly embrace the indictments and calumnies of the attackers, however bigoted or absurd. Some will seek to reform their community in conformity with the attacks against it in the hope that, if the community follows their lead, it will appease the besiegers and win relief. Others seek personal relief from the siege by distancing themselves from the community, or even overtly joining the camp of the community's enemies. This article seeks to explicate how the history of Jewish defamation of Israel conforms to these patterns within communities under chronic attack. The phenomenon of such defamation will inexorably continue as long as Israel remains under siege, and the response to this defamation should incorporate understanding of its roots and offshoots.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
153349
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Following a well-established research tradition on court decisions, this study analyses 524 defamation cases in China from 1993 to 2013, explores the media's success possibilities, and investigates the role of party capacity, political influence and the medium effect. Contrary to the existing assertions, we find that the media are not necessarily losing. On average, from 1993 to 2013, the success rate of news media in Chinese defamation courts was 42 per cent, and this rate has been increasing since 2005. We also find that government officials and Party organs had consistent advantages in court, while ordinary plaintiffs, magazines and websites had less success. The medium of the media (i.e. print, broadcast, internet) makes a difference, as do the government policies governing the media. In addition, local protectionism exists, but it is less rampant than expected. These findings compel us to rethink the dynamics among the media, the courts and the state, and their implications on China's institutional resilience.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|