An open letter to President Joe Biden. 

Detected Manipulations & Suggested Changes

Biased language

The article uses biased language to portray a negative view of Israel and a positive view of Palestinian Americans.

In both Israel’s view and behaviour, there are several classes of Americans: American Jews with pro-Israel views who are welcomed and even encouraged to become citizens; most other Americans who are welcomed as tourists or investors; Americans who support Palestinian human rights, including American Jews and African Americans, who face additional scrutiny; Americans of Arab descent who are viewed with suspicion and often interrogated on entry and exit; and American citizens of Palestinian descent who are deemed the lowest class.

3 suggestions

Use neutral language to describe the different treatment of individuals based on their views or ethnicity.

Provide a balanced perspective by including the reasons behind Israel's security measures.

Avoid generalizations and provide specific examples to support claims.

Omission of key information

The article omits key information about the reasons behind Israel's security measures and the historical context of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Earlier this year, your ambassador to Israel assured us that your administration would insist that Israel treat every American citizen equally. He insisted that “Blue is blue.” With that assurance, we felt some confidence that our concerns were being heard. Instead of honouring both that commitment and the statutory requirement of the VWP that member countries agree to provide each other’s citizens with a guarantee of reciprocal rights, your administration allowed Israel to define its own interpretation of “reciprocal rights.”

2 suggestions

Include the reasons behind Israel's security measures and the historical context of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict to provide a more comprehensive understanding of the situation.

Present multiple perspectives on the issue to avoid bias and promote objectivity.

Appeal to emotion

The article uses emotional language to evoke a strong emotional response from the reader.

Because Israel was allowed to redefine reciprocity, essentially writing their own terms for admission into the VWP, without including a non-discrimination provision that dealt with their treatment of Arab Americans at entry, exit, and checkpoints, or respect for freedom of expression— your administration has failed to meet the commitment you made to us. This is why I’m insulted, betrayed, and angry.

2 suggestions

Use neutral language to present the facts and avoid emotional language that may bias the reader.

Provide evidence and specific examples to support claims rather than relying on emotional appeals.