I saw the movie "gaza strip" last night with some fellow medical students in the second year class. It was an interesting documentary. In the car on the way home we talked about it and the chief criticism offered by people was that it was too biased and too one-sided. That just didn't sit well with me. Why aren't news and media criticized for the same reason? Is it because they offer a facade of balance in their reporting? They never acknowledge that their reports that we read/see are also biased by their selection of whose voices are heard and whose are silenced by editing. This movie was called GAZA STRIP. It's a palestinian story about their plight. It didn't claim to be a "balanced" perspective of the conflict, it just told a story from a 13 yr old's perspective. We all know from the start that this is the point of view the director has chosen to take. When documentaries are done on less controversial issues, such as the famine in Ethiopia in 1984, no one screams out for "balanced" reporting b/c only the stories of the people starving are shown and the stories of those in political positions of power who stand accused are not portrayed. ¶ 10:00