It is always interesting to see how different people see and perceive the same events, each from his/her own perspective, and come up with completely different, even opposing, understandings of those events.

For example, in this past weeks array of local Bet Shemesh newspapers, they all described a recent municipal committee meeting in which a vote was meant to take place on a number of issues including RBS C/G/3/Gimmel. I don't recall (and don't have the papers in front of me) exactly the details of what they were to be voting on, and it does not matter for the discussion here.

The secular and DL reps found out that the meeting was going to include a certain vote, so they presented a united front, got everybody there, even pulling in a rep from his vacation out of the city, and presented a majority to vote against the proposal.

The mayor retracted the intent to hold a vote on the issue.

Here were the different perspectives:

The secular papers all presented the situation as a successful stand of unity made by the secular and DL reps. They got their acts together, stood as one for their common interests and showed themselves as a majority that would reject the proposal. (nothing was really gained, because the vote was only delayed, and they did not have the opportunity to actually reject it. But it was a sign of unity and the ability to work together for their common cause).

the haredi newspaper presented the situation as a successful "targil", or maneuver, pulled by the mayor and haredi reps against the others. They got all the other reps to show their true intentions by submitting a proposal for a vote, and then pulled it at the last minute, even ruining one reps vacation in the process (I could not tell if they were gloating about that or just considered it an unfortunate inconvenience).

Different perspectives of the same incident, with completely opposite explanations of what happened.