1. Introduction of the Issue
"Selective reporting involves devoting more resources, such as news articles or air time, to the coverage of one side of the story over another."
The basic issue of The Israeli–Palestinian conflict is the relationship between claimed cause and claimed effect. Israel, its supporters and advocates, generally claim a relationship of Palestinian Terrorism is the cause of Israel's extreme security measures. Palestinians, their supporters and advocates, generally claim a relationship of Israel's extreme security measures are the cause of Palestinian Terrorism.
The following are criteria to determine the existence and extent of selective reporting:
1) Reporting of one side of the relationship in absolute numbers.
2) The relative reporting of one side of the relationship to the reporting of the other side.
3) The level of the description used.
4) Possible consequence of under reporting the other side of the relationship.
Let's test drive the criteria above for Neil Godfrey's blog Vridar starting with a search of his site for "Israel" and summarize:
1) The number of articles involving Israel.
2) The tone of the article regarding Israel.
3) The extent of the article's tone towards Palestinians:
1. Postscript on Rome’s and Israel’s foundation stories
Israel tone = The purpose of the article is to consider parallels between The Jewish Bible's Israel origination stories and Greek origination stories. In the comments you can see the author theorize that the Jewish stories were to some extent copied from the Greek and that a historical Jewish Palestine was significantly later than what The Jewish Bible indicates.
Palestinian tone = No direct mention of Palestinians here. The article has an implication, which is explicit in prior related articles, that if "The Jews'" history in Israel is much later than is commonly thought/argued than someone else must have been there earlier/much earlier such as maybe, I don't know, Palestinians?
2. Comparing the Rome’s and Israel’s Foundation Stories, Aeneas and Abraham
Israel tone = Same as above.
Palestinian tone = Same as above. If the author wanted to objectively compare who's claim to Israel/Palestine is earlier a good comparison would be, which one, Israelis or Palestinians, use the other one's religious book as the start of their history? Hmmm.
3. How Philo-Semitic British Israelism Morphed into Anti-Semitic White Supremacism / Christian Identity
Israel tone = The article is about antisemitic beliefs and not about Israel.
Palestinian tone = The article is about Christian antisemitism and not Muslim/Palestinian antisemitism. So based on this article Israel has reason to feel threatened, just not by Muslims/Palestinians.
4. Reality Behind Arab Threats to Destroy Israel
Israel tone = Israeli leadership knew from the beginning that Arabs were not a significant threat to Israel and by lying to the Israeli population about the level of the threat wrongly convinced Israelis that the Arabs were a significant threat.
Palestinian tone = No mention of "Palestinians" in the article. Strangely, the Arabs are first described as easily having the ability to destroy Israel and than described as always realizing that they could not destroy Israel. Since there is no mention of Palestinians there is no mention that all Palestinian political organizations have always had a Charter calling for the destruction of Israel. Note that in the potential context of Palestinians as a threat to Israel, Godfrey's blog minimizes their numbers, in this case to -0-. In the context though of Palestinian refugees/supposed right of return they quickly multiple into greater numbers than Israelis and exponentially more than Jews with any religious/physical connection to Israel.
An objective review of the history of actual quotes/writings of Arab leaders from the beginning shows that they were not just sincere about thinking they could destroy Israel but enthusiastically sincere.
5. Primitive Democracy in Ancient Israel
Israel tone = Same as 1. and 2. above but now the source for The Jewish Bible has been expanded from Greek sources to (non-Jewish) Middle Eastern sources.
Palestinian tone = Same as 1. and 2.
6. The Inspiration for Israel’s Law of the Ideal King
Israel tone = Same as 1. and 2.
Palestinian tone = Same as 1. and 2.
7. Israel’s Best Friends to Her Rescue
Israel tone = Israel is described as being overly influenced by its "radical" element leading to a policy of illegal settlements in the West bank. These illegal settlements are said to prevent a peace agreement all by themselves and it's said that this policy will lead to an Apartheid State.
Palestinian tone = No mention of any radicals, illegal activity or plans to have an Apartheid Arab/Muslim State. In fact no mention of Palestinians at all except for the context of being victims.
8. How Israel Uses (not “Misuses”) The Bible
Israel tone = Israel is described as using The Jewish Bible to justify all of Israel being a Jewish State.
Palestinian tone = As in 7. no mention of "Palestinians" in the article except in the context of being victims. You wouldn't know from the article that it's actually the Palestinians who are primarily a religion oriented government and have a majority of their population who think all of Israel should be Arab/Muslim based on their Bible. In fact you wouldn't even know from the article that the Palestinians are Muslim.
9. The Tribes of Israel modeled on the Athenian and Ideal Greek Tribes?
Israel tone = The article is similar to most of the articles above, arguing that The Jewish Bible copied from Greek stories supporting that the Jewish history in Israel is much later than Jews would argue. The comments go beyond and all the way to The Jewish Bible dishonestly invented "history" of Jews returning to and reclaiming their homeland and demonizing the people (Canaanites/Palestinians) who were there first to justify genocide.
Palestinian tone = As always, Palestinians only referred to in the context of victims. No attempt to find similar copying/accusations in The Arab Bible.