Piers Morgan uncovered

Piers Morgan has millions of followers. To many, he is regarded as a credible journalist hosting hard hitting interviews and contentious debates. For others, he is an elevated tabloid journalist seeking clicks more than truth. Either way, he has elevated an independent form of journalism, bound to no specific network, to an art, though many would use the words elevated and journalism in quotes.

Since the October 7, 2023, Hamas attack and massacre in Israel, he has been outspoken about Israel’s right to defend itself against Hamas, Iran, and others, and the terror and genuine threats that they have perpetrated. Yet 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 war, and specifically in an urban area.  If Piers has acknowledged it at all, it would be a statistically insignificant number. But 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 that they started.

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 the life, even of fellow Gazans. However, regardless of what kind of journalist one thinks he is, he’s 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, Piers not only clearly takes the side of the anti-Israel voice of one guest, teaming up against the pro-Israel voice rather than being a credible moderator. Not only have his own positions become 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, and outright confrontational when opposite those who attempt to explain and defend Israel.

In Israel, this has become a bit of a media spectacle with many, including actual journalists, questioning what’s behind it all. There’s no shortage of Monday morning quarterbacking particularly after an Israeli guest makes a blunder. Many are asking what’s behind Piers Morgan and his criticism of Israel? Why does Piers 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 do Israel advocates continue to appear on Piers’ program in 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 he is aware and sensitive of the multi dimensions of antisemitic, tropes and actions, more than just committing a terrorist atrocity or shooting gas and burning Jews, during the Holocaust which some of his guests will also denied the substance of, or turn around and blame Israel for being the new Nazis.

Is Piers antisemitic?  He says no. But in platforming those who are, is he possibly guilty by association? In a world where so many forms of antisemitism have become acceptable, and yet those perpetrating it simply deny that they are antisemites and that’s good enough for Piers and others, is participating in that antisemitism not by definition antisemitic, or at least obscene and should be unacceptable? It’s 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.

He has been challenged not as one who necessarily hates and wishes for the wholesale massacre of Jews, but as somebody who delegitimizes Israels right to defend itself because of the nature of its government. What if there were an Israeli government that he didn’t hate 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 a 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. 

The imbalance is vivid and needs to be explored.  Please join the “Inspiration from Zion” webinar series Sunday July 20th at 2:00pm Eastern time, with a panel of guests who have faced Piers Morgan as an Israel advocate, and to hear their experiences and insights first hand.