[The Avon Lady]

Originally Posted by Type XXIII

I hope Etienne and TAL will forgive me for proving, or at least argue for, Etienne's claim.

From Jihad Watch's webpage:

In this paragraph, Jihad Watch tells its readers quite openly that their articles are based a claim that "the West is facing a concerted effort by Islamic jihadists (...)."

So you are claiming this is false? An untruth?

Note the dictionary definition for 'Bias":

bi·as ( P ) Pronunciation Key (bs)
n.

A preference or an inclination, especially one that inhibits impartial judgment.

An unfair act or policy stemming from prejudice.

Please point out the "impartial judgements" and the "unfairness" of the articles posted.

Just imagine had they been called "NaziWatch.com".

All their articles are written from this point of view, and have as purpose to prove this claim. They only describe events that further their claim, and are therefore biased.

This itself is absolutely untrue. They have numerous times quoted news articles, politicians, authors and religious personalities with contrary positions and have challenged those positions based on referential quotes and facts from extrenal sources, most often from within Islam itself.

I do indeed see bias here but not in JW's posted articles. Look a little closer to home.

Using a biased webpage as a news source isn't necessarily wrong, and it is important that these events also are described to the public. But when one uses a biased news source, (such as Jihad Watch,) one has to be aware of its bias, and preferably also find other sources that describe the events from another point of view.

Again, most of their posts are based on external articles. When news items turn out to be false, JW immediately notes the fact. It has, however, been a rare event.