Does popular UK media personality seek clicks more than truth?
By Jonathan Feldstein
The YouTube platform, Piers Morgan Uncensored, has millions of followers. To many, Piers is respected as a credible journalist hosting hard- hitting interviews and contentious debates. For others, he is an elevated tabloid journalist seeking clicks more than truth.
While in the wake of the October 7, 2023 Hamas attack and massacres in Israel, he has been outspoken about supporting Israel’s right to defend itself against Hamas, Iran, and others, in recent months he has become a loud and vocal critic of Israel. He openly states that Israel’s war on Hamas in Gaza is “disproportionate”. He quotes casualty figures that are reported by the Hamas-run “Gaza Health Ministry” as fact – an important element in any journalism – but which are unsubstantiated.
While there have been no shortage of civilian casualties – and the death of any innocent civilian is indeed a tragedy – there’s also evidence of Hamas staging what’s known as “Pallywood” propaganda films to deceive the world with fake casualties. It seems to work, if only evidenced by Piers using terms suggesting Israel is committing genocide, war crimes, and ethnic cleansing, and not giving credence to the fact that the civilian-to-combatant (terrorist) casualty rate is documented as the lowest in the history of warfare – specifically in an urban area. If Piers has acknowledged it at all, it would be a statistically insignificant number. He fails to allow for the truth that by embedding its terrorists and terror infrastructure in and among Gazan civilians, and by not releasing all the hostages, Hamas is responsible for every civilian casualty in a war they initiated.
Indeed, Israel can and perhaps should have conducted operations differently and there’s been a learning curve in a war the sort of which nobody has ever engaged with a ruthless enemy that worships death more than respecting life, even of fellow Gazans. However, regardless of what kind of journalist one thinks of Piers Morgan, he is certainly not impartial.
Many have observed that conversations and debates that used to have more depth and integrity are now peppered with his own positions. Sometimes, even often when hosting a debate, rather than being a credible moderator, Piers clearly takes the side of the anti-Israel voice of one guest, teaming up against the pro-Israel voice. Not only has his own positions hardened against Israel, but he frequently platforms people who espouse rhetoric more than facts, vile antisemitic tropes, and vulgarity more than they are credible commentators. Some have accused him of antisemitism personally, a charge he firmly denies.
Yet following a conversation with one openly antisemitic guest, Piers thanked her for her views. In another case, he either lost control or allowed another guest to espouse antisemitic views that would make Hitler blush, defending himself that he could not stop her, much less shut off her mic. If moderating debates that he orchestrates is his thing, at best that was a spectacular failure. There are other examples.
Many of his debates have devolved into verbal brawls which may be good for ratings, but not for truth or serious dialogue. Observers have noted that his “hard-hitting” interviews have become more softball fluff when encountering people with whom he agrees, while outright confrontational when sitting opposite those who attempt to explain and defend Israel.
Many are questioning what is behind Piers Morgan and his criticism of Israel? Why does he so frequently platform people who are not experts, or are not necessarily qualified, particularly comedians and those who cannot debate facts, but leap into ad hominem attacks? Why on the other hand, do Israel-supporting guests encounter such an increasingly hostile environment?
While he denies vociferously being an antisemite, there is a question about whether it is acceptable to platform people who are overt antisemites. There’s no shortage of such guests who he hosts and thanks. Sometimes he will challenge them with an occasional hardball question, but mostly the antisemitic tropes, which they publicize to millions are ignored.
It raises the question as to whether Piers is aware and sensitive of the multi dimensions of antisemitic tropes and actions. While Piers ardently denies he is antisemitic, in platforming those who are, is he possibly guilty by association? And why in a world today where so many forms of antisemitism have become acceptable is Piers so quick to accept the word of these patently antisemites when they deny they are antisemites? Is not participating in this charade not by definition antisemitic and thus should be unacceptable? It is hard to imagine that Piers ever would host a person who wants to kill all gays and lesbians or is a violent criminal white supremacist, just to hear their views and then thank them rather than rebuke them!
Piers is been challenged not as one who is suspected might support the wholesale massacre of Jews but as somebody who delegitimizes Israel’s right to defend itself because of the nature of its government. What if there was an Israeli government that he didn’t despise so much conducting the war on Hamas? He frequently ascribes to all of Israel accusations of “genocide”, “ethnic cleansing”, and “war crimes” based on individual comments or implications of a handful Israelis, who have made inflammatory comments that most Israelis reject. He also speaks to pro-Israel guests in an accusatory way, referring to such guests as “you” relating to all of Israel, regardless of whether the guest is an Israeli government minister, Israeli citizen, or non-Israeli Jew. Highlighting the bias, Piers does not do the same when confronting anti-Israel guests, accusing them as being pro-Hamas.
With Piers’ handling of these issues so imbalanced necessitating, I felt, to be seriously explored, I decided to moderate a panel discussion inviting two guests who had appeared as advocates for Israel on Piers Morgan program to hear of their experiences first hand. The insights of both panelists – Shabbos Kestenbaum, a regular contributor to the international media who has testified multiple times before the US Congress, and Doron Spielman, a New York Times bestselling author and a Major in the IDF Reserves serving as an international military spokesperson providing frontline analysis to global audiences – are both riveting and illuminating and can be accessed at https://youtu.be/WuMH7bsC-H4.
About the writer:
Jonathan Feldstein - President of the US based non-profit Genesis123 Foundation whose mission is to build bridges between Jews and Christians – is a freelance writer whose articles appear in The Jerusalem Post, Times of Israel, Townhall, NorthJersey.com, Algemeiner Jornal, The Jewish Press, major Christian websites and more.
While the mission of Lay of the Land (LotL) is to provide a wide and diverse perspective of affairs in Israel, the Middle East and the Jewish world, the opinions, beliefs and viewpoints expressed by its various writers are not necessarily ones of the owners and management of LOTL but of the writers themselves. LotL endeavours to the best of its ability to credit the use of all known photographs to the photographer and/or owner of such photographs (0&EO).
