Dear Editor,
I appreciate the Beacon’s decision to report on the concerns raised about the hiring of Brown Middle School’s new social studies teacher. I was disappointed, however, by aspects of the article’s own framing of the Israel-Hamas war.
The article says that Hamas’s October 7 attack, in which approximately 1,200 people were killed and 250 taken hostage, “prompt[ed] the massive retaliation in Gaza.” Describing Israel’s war as “retaliation” is itself a characterization, and an incomplete one. Israel’s stated war aims were to secure the release of the hostages, dismantle Hamas’s military and governing capabilities, and prevent Gaza from again posing a threat to Israel. One can strongly criticize how Israel pursued those objectives without reducing the purpose of the war to retaliation.
I was also troubled by the article’s treatment of the accusation of genocide. It reports that a UN commission “determined that the State of Israel has committed a genocide,” while describing Israel as simply denying the charge and “claiming” that it targeted Hamas terrorists. The genocide characterization remains deeply contested. The article could have made that clear rather than leaving readers with the impression that genocide is an established fact and Israel’s contrary position merely a denial.
This matters particularly in an article about concerns I and others raised over how contested political claims are treated in education. My concern has never been that students should be taught a particular position on Israel. Quite the opposite: when serious factual, historical or legal questions remain contested, students should be given the relevant context and competing evidence rather than one side’s conclusions as established fact.
The same standard should apply to journalism.
Best,
Lisa Shatz
Brookline
Recently spoke during Newton School Committee meeting