171–180 of 434 posts
It's worth noting the BBC has also been accused of an anti-Israel bias including but not limited to airing a documentary produced by a Hamas linked individuals[1]. [1] https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c07zz5937llo
The fact that they have the same complaint from both "sides" suggests to me that they are doing a good job providing balanced coverage.
> Off-Topic: Most stories about politics https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html edit: honestly, look at the comment quality on this post. There's a reason that HN should avoid purely political stuff like this.
Recent BBC World headlines: Gaza doctor whose nine children were killed in Israeli strike dies from injuries (June 2) Gaza now worse than hell on earth, humanitarian chief tells BBC (June 4) Three journalists among five killed in Israeli strike on Gaza hospital (June 5) Four killed near Gaza aid centre, health workers say (June 8) Dozens of Palestinians killed while seeking aid in Gaza, hospitals say (June 11) More t…
I read the article but not sure which pro Israeli editorials the BBC has published. My experience is quite the opposite with BBC having a clear anti war stance.
> We believe the refusal to broadcast the documentary ‘Gaza: Medics Under Fire’ is just one in a long line of agenda driven decisions.
Recent BBC World headlines: Gaza doctor whose nine children were killed in Israeli strike dies from injuries (June 2) Gaza now worse than hell on earth, humanitarian chief tells BBC (June 4) Three journalists among five killed in Israeli strike on Gaza hospital (June 5) Four killed near Gaza aid centre, health workers say (June 8) Dozens of Palestinians killed while seeking aid in Gaza, hospitals say (June 11) More t…
1. You don't have the counterfactual here, so who's to say how the world would have turned out without exhortations from top brass. 2. Recent is the keyword. The tide of public sentiment has shifted somewhat against Israel in this conflict as the civilian casualties mount & theater of combat expands, so maybe it's easier to be a Brave Truth-Teller in the past 2 months of a conflict whose most recent flare-up dates ba…
This presumes the journalists are somehow neutral to begin with. If they're biased to be anti-israel, then arguably the top brass telling them to tone it down a notch would make the coverage more neutral.
>3. These seem like fairly sanitized headlines considering what they're actually talking about. Consider the last one vs "Israeli Terrorist Strike Murders Dozens, Though They Claim One Murdered Individual Among the Group Not So Innocent" or something. So even though some of the facts are getting reported on, how they're reported on (arguably almost as important) could still be an editorial decision from higher echelons.
This presumes there's some Objectively Neutral™ version of a headline for a story, but how do know what that should be? Is the "Israeli Terrorist Strike Murders Dozens ..." wording supposed to be the neutral version? If that's the neutral version, I can't imagine what the anti-israeli version is supposed to be.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Society came very close to realizing the beginnings of a decent state in Catalonia during the Spanish Civil War. George Orwell faught in it, and wrote about what he saw that society achieving in his book, Homage to Catalonia.
It's not that hard for a new idea to look good for a couple short months/years. Building an ongoing, self-sustaining society that doesn't go completely off the rails is a whole other thing. There's a reason all these idyllic examples people give (Catalonia, Pre-USSR Ukrainian socialism, Paris Commune) were short-lived. If the Bolshevist revolution had been quashed in 1919, it would be idealized today.
Centralization of power has so far made every society deeply flawed or even hellish. The three societies you mentioned are the only ones where power was purposefully decentralized, and that seems to be the most promising path forward that was never allowed to stretch its legs.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> BTW, this article doesn't mention that Gazans are still holding Israelis hostage, nor October 7th... Ah yes, the 7 remaining hostages. But don’t forget that that counter is still zero for Israel only because all the people that could have been taken hostage have instead been killed.
It would be alot more than 7 if Hamas didn't murder a bunch.
since key players realized decades ago how much sway news outlets hold over public opinion, a vast amount of them have been co-opted to spread propaganda [0]. at least a dozen countries and probably more (including Israel) are tapped directly into the five/fourteen eyes [1][2] intelligence network, countries which share "raw sigint" [3] with each other and strategically disseminate international propaganda to the all…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
It's possible to believe that both October 7th and the subsequent genocide of Palestinians are horrific. It's the duty of the press to report on these horrors in an unbiased and impartial manner. > You few bleeding heart lefties Ad hominems aren't arguments, fyi
Recent BBC World headlines: Gaza doctor whose nine children were killed in Israeli strike dies from injuries (June 2) Gaza now worse than hell on earth, humanitarian chief tells BBC (June 4) Three journalists among five killed in Israeli strike on Gaza hospital (June 5) Four killed near Gaza aid centre, health workers say (June 8) Dozens of Palestinians killed while seeking aid in Gaza, hospitals say (June 11) More t…
Well, you're capable of some level. The allegations in no way suggest that articles critical of Israel aren't run.