Israelis Stopped a Terrorist Hijacking. Why Did the Media Call It an ‘Altercation’?

Thanks to the tenacity, bravery, and ingenuity of some everyman Israeli passengers, we’ll remember Sept. 30 as just another day, rather than another 9/11. But it came close. Last Wednesday, a routine Dubai-Tel Aviv flight was menaced when a co-pilot stabbed his captain and commenced a wrenching nosedive that saw the aircraft lose nearly three miles of altitude in around a minute. Quick-thinking Israeli travelers stormed the cockpit, subdued the attacker, righted the plane, and likely saved 174 lives.

So the people we rely upon to tell us the news dragged their feet on one of the biggest stories of the year, because Israelis saved the day.

However, you might have missed these details if you’d been following along in conventional media. The story reached American and British front pages hours after Israeli ones, including Israeli outlets reporting in English such as the Jerusalem Post and Times of Israel. Even then, per the BBC and the New York Times, what occurred on FlyDubai flight 1073 was only a “fight” or “altercation” between pilots. Nothing to worry about. Note their stories were published hours after the plane reported an alert code signaling “unlawful interference,” meaning hijacking or hostage-taking — facts reflected in Israeli media within minutes.

Many more examples abound, from CNN and The Washington Post to Sky News and The Guardian: outlets waited as long as they could to begin using terms like “stabbing” and “hijacking.” For hours they further couched their coverage as mere reporting of Israeli statements, wrapping headlines in language such as “Netanyahu says” — introducing needless and wholly avoidable skepticism. Some employed this terminology even after witnesses had landed in Saudi Arabia and had begun speaking as primary sources to international media.

What’s going on? Since being first to press is industry currency, why wouldn’t major outlets want to land on the most sensational story possible as soon as it’s verified?

The answer gets to an uncomfortable truth about the intersection between modern journalism, politics, and culture. In contrast to the golden age of Western broadcasting, where “the most trusted man in America” would report the news straight to millions of people, today it is more often the tail of opinion wagging the dog of media — in which journalists’ own perspectives (and perceptions of the perspectives of their audiences) increasingly color their coverage. Research on this phenomenon is limited but growing.

In practice, this means that even the most “newsy” stories reflect their authors’ opinions to some degree. Nowadays, with unfavorable views of Israel becoming more widespread, especially among the progressive demographics that overwhelmingly populate our largest newsrooms, is it really a surprise that journalists would hesitate on stories which might make Israel and Israelis look good? We know, of course, that even the most cautious of outlets are somehow always ready to jump on shoddy scoops where Israel can be pitched as a villain — overlooking their own standards and occasionally needing to walk those pieces back.

So the people we rely upon to tell us the news dragged their feet on one of the biggest stories of the year, because Israelis saved the day. (It probably didn’t help that the co-pilot and alleged hijacker was an Omani national.) This is a crisis not only because of the abstract value of good journalism, but because storytelling prefigures policy and even national identity. Weeks ago, we marked 25 solemn years since 9/11, the deadliest terror attack in human history, where radical Islamist hijackers commandeered and crashed passenger planes to murder 2,977 innocent people.

In that attack’s searing aftermath, the U.S. and the greater West showed incredible resolve, lucidly identifying the threat and uniting to ensure it could no longer menace the free world. Yesterday was an attempt at similar destruction, but unlike in 2001, it’s less clear that American and European societies would again be brave enough to stand against the sabers of extremist political Islam.

Recall that the first victim of 9/11 was Israeli-American computer scientist and IDF veteran Daniel Lewin, who tried (and tragically failed) to stop the terrorists hijacking American Airlines flight 11. Despite yesterday’s headlines’ best attempts to obfuscate the truth, then as now Israelis and Americans are at the vanguard of the fight against terror, safeguarding the freedoms we hold dear, often at severe personal cost.

The challenges of our age require being clear about who are our friends and who are our enemies. From 9/11 to 9/30, everyday Israelis have shown that they are the greatest friends of freedom, and, very often, the grandest of heroes.

The world can learn from them, if it is willing.

Naftali Shavelson served as Media Director at the Israeli consulate in New York