Maybe, maybe not, but do you agree that international journalists would be less likely to be biased that the average Palestinian or Isreali supporter?
-
Join the MyBroadband community
South Africa’s biggest forum. Discuss, discover, and connect with thousands of members.
-
Question of the Day: Google Maps vs Waze vs Apple Maps vs physical paper maps?
2023 Israel-Hamas war [Part 3]
- Thread starter Sideshow Bob
- Start date
Sideshow Bob
Honorary Master
Can you name one "neutral" journalist who will report on IDF and Hamas atrocities at the same time ?
TheMightyQuin
Not amused...
Israel have their reasons...mainly the concern for the safety of these journalists.
Can you just imagine if Hamas kidnaps a team of BBC journalists and demand the IDF leave Gaza or they will be killed?
I personally think that the IDF should open the floodgates and let all these journalists in. With signed declaimers that if they get killed or kidnapped...it's on THEM and their governments' heads.
Not sure why the clamor for this apart from it being just another stick to hit Israel with daily. The millions of videos and posts out of Gaza DAILY, provided more than enough "information".
Agencies like BBC use these unconfirmed and unverified videos and stories daily on social media...and it's lapped up for the truth. So what else do they need?
TheMightyQuin
Not amused...
Unfortunately I do not.
Why would you think that reuters or associated press wouldn't report on both? Unless you are suggesting that all news agencies are aligned behind one side or the other wothout any attempt at impartiality?
https://apnews.com/article/israel-p...h-war-crimes-567044302774ae10c18ff7e68ae57025
https://apnews.com/article/genocide...ians-reports-5dc7c99fb0a3e7416564c78986ce7f5f
So, two stories, one about Israel, one about Hamas... Why the assumption that any news agency would just ignore a story about an atrocity due to some hidden allegiance to one side of the other?
Sideshow Bob
Honorary Master
Are they reporting against Hamas or IDF by sitting in Gaza ? You really think they will survive ?
Oh well, carry on believing whatever you want to believe then. It must be comforting in a way as you can just assume that any story you disagree with must be biased in some way.
Reporting from war zones has always been hazardous, but sometimes, that is the only way for cerain truths to come out.
I doubt the world would ever have learnt about the My Lai massacre or the extent of the Cambodian genocide if dedicated journalists had not been willing to put themselves in harms away.
Journalists have been reporting from war zones for decades, it's not a convincing argument.
Nope, but I can easily imagine that it's much easier for the IDF to dismiss reports from within Gaza if they are associated with a terrorist organisation.
I think that most journalists would accept that risk as part of the job of reporting from a war zone.
You think that everyone has an agenda and is biased so I doubt you would see the benefit of independant, international journalists giving more impartial take on things in Gaza.
TheMightyQuin
Not amused...
You know I will.
Also if you really believe that journalism nowadays are impartial, I have a bridge to sell you.
Journalists do not report on news events anymore...they create their own news. Conservative AND liberal...
I don't think it matters. People now only want the news that suits their purpose, the rest is fake news. The same people who quote the NY Times for one thing, rubbish their next report that they don't want to believe because 'it's the NY Times" or the BBC or Al Jazeera or Jerusalem Post etc etc.
Imagine the BBC get unrestricted access into Gaza and they report on what they see. They conclude for example that there is no famine and it's all down to Hamas stealing the food.
Do you think @3Gee and @Kaapie etc would believe it? Of course not. These guys deny the slaughter on October 7th ffs. There is no chance. But say it the other way around and they'd be all over it. And that goes for both sides.
No bud, we are long past the point of the truth being the truth. The truth is now what people want it to be.
Nerfherder
Honorary Master
There is, because they voted them in and have not made a change.
Tell me you are a fool who doesn't understand the situation - without telling me you are a fool who doesn't understand the situation.
TheMightyQuin
Not amused...
I never said it was.
Why would the IDF ever need any reports from journalists??
Of course they would. Nothing like a good old Pulitzer prize is there? But it is the response from governments and of course the hysterical members of the public, that will launch a massive outcry.
No such thing...
A perfect example. Since AP were kicked out of the White House, a certain group of people don't believe a thing they write. They won't even read the article as we saw with Ivan in the Covid threads.
Hard disagree, I agree that some people dont care about the truth, but if you throw up your hands and suggest that there is no objective truth then you might as well stop reading any news sites and just make up whatever narrative you want.
And I completely disagree, good talk.
they voted them in
now lets unpack that statement
you said the majority of Palestinians support Hamas
Hamas "won" an election almost 20 years ago, with 44% of the vote, not everybody voted in that election
the average age of a Palestinian is under 20, so you are telling me people under 20 voted for Hamas almost 20 years ago?
there is at best a minitory support using your "voted them in" logic
try harder
TheMightyQuin
Not amused...
Also then maybe take note of YOUR attitude and feelings re. these matters?
And this is why "reporting" by "journalists" from Gaza has become moot. People's minds have been made up and no one will budge at this stage.
And that is exactly what people are doing. I guarantee if you post something on here and it's not backing someones agenda, they will poo poo all over the organisation.
As it stands, I consume certain outlets and I belive wholehearterdly that at least one of them is unbiased. But I've shared links in the past and been shat over for it, people belive what they want. What the journalist says is neither here nor there for most folks, so I can certainly understand Israel restricing access as letting them into Gaza is a lose/lose for them..
We shouldn't be judging this based on what fringe loonies think. So how about this, do you think that an article by the AP would be less biased than one from the IDF press office?