Talk:Criticism of Israel

This page is subject to the extended confirmed restriction related to the Arab-Israeli conflict.

"Isnotreal" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Isnotreal has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 March 30 § Isnotreal until a consensus is reached. Jay 💬 07:36, 30 March 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed edit request

Please add a clarification at this article's top saying "not to be confused with criticism of Judaism". It is a common confusion and hopefully one to alleviate. Lan Pee (talk) 16:21, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

 Done. Good thought. --EatingCarBatteries _{(contributions, talk)} 05:08, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 21 May 2025

Russian oppositionist, publicist, blogger of socio-political topics Maxim Katz, now living in Israel, assesses the new anti-Israel propaganda as follows:

In modern Russia, a truly unique situation has developed - no one wants to berate Israel. Official Russian propaganda exploits the theme of good Russian-Israeli relations: ‘Israel is good, and very smart, and therefore, unlike the West, which has lost its bearings, wants to be friends with Russia.’ Russian-speaking Israelis are routinely invited to Russian talk shows to praise Russia as if they were Israelis. However, the few independent media outlets that remain in Russia are also reluctant to criticise the Israeli state, for various reasons, including the fact that they don't want to be like the Soviet observers who buzzed their audiences with horror stories about the Israeli military. The modern Russian citizen, being in his information bunker, is not even aware of the monstrous scale and ingenuity of anti-Israeli propaganda in the rest of the world. The Qatari media company Al Jazeera, which broadcasts to the entire planet in both Arabic and English, is particularly successful here. At one time Israel, even though it has no diplomatic relations with Qatar, invited one of the largest Arab TV channels to its territory to show its openness. However, Al Jazeera, on the one hand, engaged in blatant incitement of the Palestinian population, and on the other hand, for the Western viewer, it began to paint a picture of terrible war crimes and crimes against alleged humanity, such as those committed by Israel against the Palestinians. Without exaggeration, for millions of viewers in the West, Israel was likened almost to Nazi Germany. Of course, Al Jazeera is silent about terrorist attacks against Israelis. Moreover, it incites them by inciting hatred among Palestinians. But Al Jazeera is not alone. Anti-Israeli propaganda is a large-scale phenomenon, about which entire academic papers have been written. Many media outlets, social media accounts, and supposedly human rights organisations are working for this propaganda. All this has given rise to a new phenomenon - left-wing anti-Semitism, which has swept the developed Western countries. While anti-Semitism used to be a characteristic feature of nationalists, now Western nationalists, with the exception of the most radical marginalised, mostly avoid anti-Jewish rhetoric in order not to be associated with Nazis from the last century. So it is mainly people of left-wing views in Western countries who are now against Israel. Participants in anti-Israeli rallies and actions in support of Palestinians, which before the pandemic took place regularly in the West, like to emphasise - ‘We are not against the Jews, we are against Israel!’. In practice, however, separating one from the other almost never works. [...] In relation to Israel, such stories of Al Jazeera are thrown in all the time, and unlike Russia Today, Al Jazeera is not a project for cutting state finances, it is a real successful propaganda tool that has a serious impact on the Western audience. This has led to a surprising effect - the democratic state of Israel, economically developed, with a developed legal system, independent courts, free media, a representative parliament, where a significant faction of Arab residents of Israel, and in general all the signs of an advanced Western democracy, is perceived by people in Western countries almost hateful country.

Чупчік927 (talk) 22:10, 21 May 2025 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Day Creature (talk) 00:29, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

I would just like to add this quote to the article, because it describes the current anti-Israeli sentiment quite well. and there is no way to add a more reliable source, because this quote was said in the video, and it seems to have not been used by other media. Чупчік927 (talk) 11:39, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

The quote is way too long to be added to the article, and it is from a YouTube video, not a reliable source. Day Creature (talk) 21:44, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

Essay vs Article

Is this an Essay or an Article? 39.40.52.102 (talk) 13:16, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

It's an article. You can tell this from the namespace it is allocated to in the database, which is namespace 0. If it were an essay, it would be in namespace 4. Wikipedia:Essays is an essay about essays, and it too is in namespace 4. I hope that addresses your question. For future reference, this article is covered by WP:ARBECR so edit requests should follow the WP:EDITXY guideline. Sean.hoyland (talk) 13:25, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

‘Responses to criticism’ vs ‘Claims of bias and disproportionate attention on Israel’

I find the last two sections of this article to be slightly confusing/repetitive in the way they are laid out. Most of the last section, ‘Claims of bias […]’, seems to be covering what could be called responses to criticism, and indeed the ‘Responses to criticism’ section has two different subsections covering ‘claims of bias’, one of which specifically covers bias on the part of the UN, while there is also subsequently a UN subsection under the ‘Claims of bias […]’ section… Hopefully you see what I mean. I’m not sure what is substantially different about most of the info in the last section that it couldn’t just be part of the section above. Could they be combined? Perhaps with a separate heading for the ‘disproportionate attention’ part? Sorry if this has been discussed before, and please feel free to disagree! Just seems like it could really use some tightening up… Gravelove (talk) 08:29, 21 June 2025 (UTC)