Behind the Headunes in Search of Sensationalism

For 13 days the news media found itself in desperate straits. Close to 400 correspondents assigned to cover the historic Camp David summit talks found themselves encamped in Thurmont, Md. some six miles from Camp David being spoonfed non-substantial reports about the summit’s goings-on by Presidential News Secretary Jody Powell.

But correspondents being what they are–creative writers, by and large–and under pressure from their editors to come up with stories to match the hyped-up headlines that had been written without the benefit of facts, worked feverishly to produce “factual,” if not “actual, ” reports to match the headlines. They interviewed each other, created likely scenarios, padded plots with subplots and “learned” that there were behind-the-scenes crises and frantic maneuverings by the three principals.

Thus, the summit talks were on the verge of breaking up; Egyptian President Anwar Sadat was packing it in; Israeli Premier Menachem Begin and Sadat were glowering at each other; President Carter was twisting Begin’s arms, and Sadat’s arms at regular and precise intervals; that King Hussein of Jordan was coming to Camp David; and/or that the principals were holding secret rendezvous, albeit calling it accidental encounters of a second kind. Speculation and theorizing ran rampant, and the more devoid of reality they were the more “factual” they became in the daily dispatches for many of the correspondents. In fact, many of these “factual” reports were subsequently denied by Begin and Sadat.

Finally the fruits of the 13 days of labor at Camp David were revealed to the entire world: the night of Sept. 17 when Carter, Begin and Sadat sat in the East Room of the White House and signed, in front of television cameras, two historic “frameworks” for peace; and the night of Sept. 18 when Carter, again before television cameras, addressed a joint session of Congress and outlined the elements of what he termed a bright moment in human history. On both nights, too, the entire world viewed Sadat and Begin embracing each other and shaking hands and watched Begin and Sadat embracing Carter. The factual and the actual now seemed to blend in reality.

BLOWING THE STORY

But there was the rub. The media, which should have returned to its metier–reporting the objective facts–blew the real story: that Egypt and Israel were in 98 percent agreement regarding the “Framework for the Conclusion of a Peace Treaty Between Egypt and Israel” and that only two percent required clarification.

This reality was underscored by Carter in his summation of the framework when he said: “This document encompasses almost all of the issues between the two countries and resolves these issues. A few lines remain to be drawn on maps and the question of the settlements (in Sinai) is to be resolved. Other than that, most of the major issues are resolved already in this document.”

With a genuine gopher’s eye view of history, many columnists and editorial writers took the route of presenting their readers with dire, Cassandra-like forebodings about the “pitfalls” and “calamities” regarding the two percent and minimized the 98 percent.

Many editorial writers and columnists also riveted their gaze on the seeming “differences of interpretation” of some elements of the frameworks between Begin and the White House rather than on the fundamental agreements between the three principals and the acknowledgements by White House spokesmen and Begin that the “differences” may be genuine misunderstandings on a few points that would be clarified satisfactorily in a few days.

PARANOIA IN PRINT

The Washington Post, for example, in an editorial last Wednesday, moaned that the 98 percent agreement is meaningless without completing the two percent. By yesterday, the Post was on the verge of hysteria. In an editorial entitled “Spoiling Camp David,” an editorialist-oracle drooled:

“What worries us right now, to be blunt about it, is the threat posed to the Camp David accords by Menachem Begin. It may seem ungracious, in this moment of celebration, to identify him in a prospective spoiler’s role. Yet what is one to make of the way he has been acting a good part of the time since the summit ‘frameworks’ were signed? He has stressed not the three partners’ common enterprise but the putative victories he gained on this or that point and the losses inflicted on others.”

Exactly where and when did Begin do this? Never mind the facts. The oracle had spoken and then added a caveat: “Prime Minister Begin has succeeded in raising the destructive suspicion that he might like to render it politically impossible for Jordan and the Palestinians to join the negotiating process offered in the West Bank ‘framework.'” This “destructive suspicion,” entirely in the mind of the editorial writer, is the earmark of paranoia better suited to the analyst’s couch than to the paper on which it was written.

A MONUMENTAL DEVELOPMENT MINIMIZED

The media, by and large, blew the big story, the real story, because it saw no headlines in agreements: accords, especially if television has already recorded the drama and history instantaneously with the actual event, lack the exploitative and sensationalistic enticement which so many journalistic hookers require to peddle their wares. Disagreements can be embroidered, enhanced, dramatized, exacerbated, and savored. They lend themselves to think pieces, analyses, commentaries and formulas. But agreements? The media Draculas are not content unless they can taste blood. It seems that there is nothing loftier and more creative than to pose, compose and dispose of conflicts which are basically those of the media’s own creation.

Yet the real drama in the Camp David accords, the genuine history, the monumental development was precisely in the agreements achieved. That Israel and its most powerful Arab neighbor could reach 98 percent agreement after 30 years of intermittent wars, hostilities, suspicions and mutual recriminations was a qualitative leap forward in the Middle East peace process, as was the fact that the frameworks concretized a perspective of multilateral relations between Israel and Egypt and pinpointed specific steps toward involving the West Bank and Gaza Strip residents in determining their own future.

Fortunately, however, the peace made possible by the summit accords is an objective process that cannot be derailed or obscured by cynical headline writers or destructively suspicious editorial writers.

There will be no Bulletin dated Oct. 2 and none dated Oct. 3 due to Rosh Hashanah. To all our subscribers, Shanah Tovah.