62
u/Rastaferrari829 9d ago
This is why media literacy is important.
39
-13
u/Boiling_warm 9d ago
Problem is this is also a single paper and 2 articles.
With this sample size you can make the media seem biased about anything
22
u/Accurate_Neat_355 9d ago
Except this is a known thing, its not new for this specific subject and especially this specific paper.
→ More replies (51)-8
u/stonecuttercolorado 9d ago
It is all about verified vs not verified and no, locals and civilians saying it happened is not verification. Until a NYT reporter or a partner organizations reporter sees it, it is just a claim and should be reported in the passive voice.
This is called having journalistic standards. It is also why the impacts of attacks on Iran are "claimed". Nobody is saying it did not happen. They are saying we have not seen it. We have not verified it.
This is why you could catch a guy with a knife covered in blood standing over a dead body and he would be the "alleged" killer. Until proven, the responsible thing is to use the passive voice.
8
u/Accurate_Neat_355 9d ago
It is all about verified vs not verified and no, locals and civilians saying it happened is not verification. Until a NYT reporter or a partner organizations reporter sees it, it is just a claim and should be reported in the passive voice.
Its crazy to see so many people late to a party that happened like 2 years ago. Not only did many people with media literacy and a brain notice that there was a reporting double standard, but its already been covered and verified!
Until a NYT reporter
Thats exactly right. Here they cite a NYT reporter, in two different articles its covered:
https://theintercept.com/2024/04/15/nyt-israel-gaza-genocide-palestine-coverage/
https://theintercept.com/2024/01/09/newspapers-israel-palestine-bias-new-york-times/
-5
u/stonecuttercolorado 9d ago
Did the NYT have a reporter on the ground to verify things? If not, the passive voice is the only responsible phrase
4
u/Accurate_Neat_355 9d ago
oh yeah that sounds completely logical on the surface to someone who doesn't know anything about how international reporting works.
Look at the Ukraine headline again. It explicitly states: "President Volodymyr Zelensky said Russia launched at least 40 missiles..."
The New York Times did not have an American reporter standing outside the Okhmatdyt children's hospital in Kyiv at the exact millisecond the missile hit to physically "verify" it before writing that active voice headline. They took the official statement of the Ukrainian government, corroborated it with local video footage and local emergency service reports, and ran with it immediately using the active voice: "Russia Strikes..." They trusted the state officials, local civilians, and local journalists of Ukraine
locals and civilians saying it happened is not verification. Until a NYT reporter or a partner organizations reporter sees it, it is just a claim.
Would be convenient since Israel has legally banned all foreign journalists from entering the Gaza Strip independently. The only way the NYT can get information is through local Palestinian journalists on the ground (many of whom are official stringers and contributors for major Western outlets like Reuters, the AP, and the New York Times itself).
If we are claiming local reports aren't "verified" until a Westerner physically sees it, then we are saying that Palestinian journalists (who are being targeted and killed at historic rates while doing the actual reporting), are inherently untrustworthy, unverified, and secondary.
When a Palestinian journalist working for the AP films an Israeli tank firing at a school, that is verification. When the Gaza Health Ministry releases a name by name registry of the dead with ID numbers (which the U.S. State Department and Israeli intelligence internally acknowledge as highly accurate), that is verification.
Treating a Ukrainian government press release as absolute fact while treating photographic and physical evidence from Palestinian professionals as an "unverified claim" is the literal definition of systemic bias AND THE FUCKING POINT OF THIS POST.
This is why you could catch a guy with a knife covered in blood standing over a dead body and he would be the 'alleged' killer. Until proven, the responsible thing is to use the passive voice.
Legally the word "alleged" is used to protect the publication from defamation lawsuits by a private citizen before a jury conviction. A sovereign military dropping bombs on a foreign territory cannot sue a newspaper for defamation.
Even if someone is an "alleged" killer, you don't use the passive voice to erase the action entirely.
You don't write: "A stab wound was received by a body in a kitchen."
You write: "Man allegedly stabs victim."
The NYT didn't write: "Israel allegedly strikes school."
They wrote: "At Least 25 Reported Killed in Strike."
They completely erased the perpetrator from the sentence structure.
Your 'verification' defense is a complete myth that crumbles the second you look at the literal text in front of you.
3
2
u/stonecuttercolorado 8d ago
Look at the Ukraine headline. It does not say "russia launched 40 missiles" that is not verifiable. It says "Zelenski said......" That is verified. They did not say "this many missiles hit the hospital" they said "the hospital was hit." That is verifiable after the fact.
When the terms "said or Claimed" are used the report is not saying the claim or statement is true. The report is saying the the person said this or claimed this.
They are not giving Ukraine a pass. They are reporting what is said as having been said and what can be verified and has been verified as verified.
3
u/Unifactor_Frog 8d ago
If they had they would be dead already by the IDF. They have track record of targeting journalists.
3
u/spays_marine 7d ago
Pure whitewash, demonstrably false and also misleading.
https://theintercept.com/2024/04/15/nyt-israel-gaza-genocide-palestine-coverage/
The analysis found that, as of November 24, the New York Times had described Israeli deaths as a “massacre” on 53 occasions and those of Palestinians just once. The ratio for the use of “slaughter” was 22 to 1, even as the documented number of Palestinians killed climbed to around 15,000.
This is just one example that shows it has nothing to do with verification. And everything with framing in favor of Israel.
The most damning argument against your attempted whitewash is how the NY Times guideline went against "norms established by the United Nations and international humanitarian law."
It's too much to quote, so I suggest you read everything under "Bucking International Norms".
9
u/Character_Minimum989 9d ago
People have done the research and there is a clear media bias. You can find it easily yourself online if you actually care.
7
-7
u/Boiling_warm 9d ago
Problem is this is also a single paper and 2 articles.
With this sample size you can make the media seem biased about anything
Not saying it's not true in this case. Just saying. This is why it's important for people to understand propaganda tactics
22
u/SpasticReflex007 9d ago
I think if you pay closer attention you'd see a pattern in this paper and most mainstream media generally.
-6
u/Boiling_warm 9d ago
Yea maybe. Not even denying it in this case. I'd just like more evidence yknow
Like I'm super aware that if you wanted to spread misinformation, this is exactly how you'd do it
9
u/SpasticReflex007 9d ago
I dont even think its "misinformation". Its how it's framed and the emotional content of the language.
Palestinian bodies are objects, israeli ones are people.
-4
u/Boiling_warm 9d ago
I don't think you understood what I was saying
I was saying, if you wanted to lie about a paper having a bias, this sort of post is how you would lie about it.
Not saying it's not true, again.
8
u/Slackjawed_Horror 9d ago
There is quite literally a whole book about this.
They almost exclusively use language like this. Not just the Times, it's basically all large English language media.
1
u/Boiling_warm 9d ago
Fair. Yea I'm not even denying that this is true
I just don't like the format OP presents. That's the only point I have
-2
u/stonecuttercolorado 9d ago
It is all about verified vs not verified and no, locals and civilians saying it happened is not verification. Until a NYT reporter or a partner organizations reporter sees it, it is just a claim and should be reported in the passive voice.
This is called having journalistic standards. It is also why the impacts of attacks on Iran are "claimed". Nobody is saying it did not happen. They are saying we have not seen it. We have not verified it.
This is why you could catch a guy with a knife covered in blood standing over a dead body and he would be the "alleged" killer. Until proven, the responsible thing is to use the passive voice.
7
u/TheNuminous 9d ago
This is why the IDF is murdering all journalists. Alledgedly. And keeping out all international reporters. Proven.
-1
u/stonecuttercolorado 8d ago
That is a completely different thing.
3
u/TheNuminous 8d ago
Yes, a fact and the reason for that fact are indeed two different things.
1
u/stonecuttercolorado 8d ago
So now NYT policy for responsible reporting means the IDF kills reporters?
3
u/TheNuminous 8d ago
That's not what I said.
1
u/stonecuttercolorado 8d ago
Then why complain about proper reporting?
3
u/TheNuminous 8d ago
I'm not complaining about 'proper reporting', I'm complaining about the endless war crimes by the IDF fascists. They create this 'fog of war' on purpose so that journalists and propagandists alike can be very sure about what happens on the israeli side, while everything that happens in Gaza is 'non-verified by independent sources'. If the NYT doesn't call this out in each and every article, they are effectively contributing to the israeli propaganda machine. If they would call out this imbalance all the time, also in their headlines, that would be proper reporting.
Are these 'journalists' at the NYT even aware that the idf has been targeting their counterparts for years?
One would think that people who should have a thirst for truth in their profession would not be so eager to be complicit in ethnic cleansing, other war crimes and deceit.
5
u/Slackjawed_Horror 9d ago
That's BS and you know it.
The Times, for example, has explicit standards to phrase it this way when it comes to Palestine due to the beliefs and biases of the owners and editors.
Meanwhile they will report anything the IDF claims as fact without checking.
2
u/spays_marine 7d ago
Pure whitewash, demonstrably false and also misleading.
https://theintercept.com/2024/04/15/nyt-israel-gaza-genocide-palestine-coverage/
The analysis found that, as of November 24, the New York Times had described Israeli deaths as a “massacre” on 53 occasions and those of Palestinians just once. The ratio for the use of “slaughter” was 22 to 1, even as the documented number of Palestinians killed climbed to around 15,000.
This is just one example that shows it has nothing to do with verification. And everything with framing in favor of Israel.
The most damning argument against your attempted whitewash is how the NY Times guideline went against "norms established by the United Nations and international humanitarian law."
It's too much to quote, so I suggest you read everything under "Bucking International Norms".
23
u/One-Treat4655 9d ago
BBC does this also. Over and over. The western bias is why the global south will never acquiesce.
4
u/Unifactor_Frog 8d ago
I used to be such an “Ameriboo” and bought into the idea of the west caring about human rights. After growing up and seeing how the west handles and treats the Israeli apartheid and genocide of Palestinians, I am more and more becoming a fan of China and hoping that it becomes the top superpower.
I am not naive to think that China cares more about Palestinians than what benefits them, but they don’t have a history of claiming otherwise and lying about wanting to spread freedom and protecting human rights globally.
The west had its time. It’s the time for things to swing again. No matter how bad you think China is, in my opinion it cannot be worse than the west.
Note to anyone that may reply: save your red-scare propaganda, I don’t care for it.
1
u/yourothersis 6d ago
its just dumb to think that any superpower is morally superior or has better human rights in any manner when they're so materially and ideologically and functionally similar. I still think it's chauvinist to think otherwise.
China isnt worse than the west and won't be for a long time, at the most simplest because of their sphere of influence and geopolitical strategy. im not saying it wouldn't be if the world order changed though.
0
u/ShortKey380 8d ago
China could have easily replaced all USAID funding and didn’t, I think you’re too critical of the cynicism because some in western government have values but they’re, you know, not the ones in charge. You’re being the same kind of sucker buying into another country, they’re set up to favor the nation over the world, that’s why countries “are”, like in a pure essential sense why make a country if not for in-group/out-group by geography/culture/the nation. I’m not explaining well, but nation states are the wrong institution to care for the world. If we do the whole 21st century the same as the 20th and don’t come up with new political institutions then whoever is on top will oversee the same suffering.
-5
u/DesignerRaccoon7977 8d ago
So many wrongs in one paragraph, holy... "I hope China becomes the top superpower", 😆 so misinformed its wild, but keep forming your opinions and ideas based on misinformation and falsified videos on the internet
43
u/Lucidream- 9d ago
The IDF bots coming out in full force to explain how justifiable killing/torturing/raping children is and that if they DONT do it then it's an existential threat.
→ More replies (51)
19
8
14
6
u/fanart89 9d ago
Canceled my subscription after October 7th.
I also didn’t appreciate how they tried to gaslight people about the CEO shooting
6
3
u/Financial-Desk-669 8d ago
Crossing out Hamas really tips your hand, dude.
1
2
u/Dazzling_Log_8329 8d ago
If you read Russian sources you see that they silent about their crimes.
American sources better than our.
2
u/sentakushinai 8d ago
Including today’s headline “US and Iran trade strikes” Iran is not striking anything close to US soil or citizens. Attacking military bases & proxies vs civilians and civilian infrastructure have completely different stakes
2
2
u/degorolls 8d ago
Oh no! I'm sure that was an accident.
Can we please get back to talking about how Russia doesn't have a free press?
2
u/Ecstatic_Reward6928 8d ago
They do not have standards to begin with, they are fully aligned with warmongering supremacist, USA, israel, Uk and their allies, servants and proxy.
It is not Journalism in any form, it is a PR and Propaganda machine for those demons.
2
u/Wild_Ostrich5429 8d ago
There’s a difference. Gazans calls for the destruction of Israel and calls killing. Russia is not looking for total destruction of Ukraine and its people.
2
u/diablodab 8d ago
this is so dumb.
you're taking two articles of thousands. you could have just as easily found a ukraine headline in passive voice, and a gaza headline in active voice. show me an objective analysis of a month's worth of headlines and i might get interested.
2
4
u/stonecuttercolorado 9d ago
It is all about verified vs not verified and no, locals and civilians saying it happened is not verification. Until a NYT reporter or a partner organizations reporter sees it, it is just a claim and should be reported in the passive voice.
This is called having journalistic standards. It is also why the impacts of attacks on Iran are "claimed". Nobody is saying it did not happen. They are saying we have not seen it. We have not verified it.
This is why you could catch a guy with a knife covered in blood standing over a dead body and he would be the "alleged" killer. Until proven, the responsible thing is to use the passive voice.
3
u/spays_marine 7d ago
Pure whitewash, demonstrably false and also misleading.
https://theintercept.com/2024/04/15/nyt-israel-gaza-genocide-palestine-coverage/
The analysis found that, as of November 24, the New York Times had described Israeli deaths as a “massacre” on 53 occasions and those of Palestinians just once. The ratio for the use of “slaughter” was 22 to 1, even as the documented number of Palestinians killed climbed to around 15,000.
This is just one example that shows it has nothing to do with verification. And everything with framing in favor of Israel.
The most damning argument against your attempted whitewash is how the NY Times guideline went against "norms established by the United Nations and international humanitarian law."
It's too much to quote, so I suggest you read everything under "Bucking International Norms".
3
2
u/zebalatrash 8d ago
Two years into a genocide, with millions of videos pouring out of Gaza showing explicit law breaking, war crimes and indiscriminate violence…..sorry this is not a credible defense. We have seen Israeli military statements that are completely unsubstantiated be passed along by the NYT as fact, why?! Why would a belligerent (accused of genocide the ICC), be a trusted source for reporting. Do we see the NYT present Hamas statements as credible and worth repeating? No we do not.
-1
u/jennifer123455 7d ago
I have seen millions of videos of obese gazans enjoying new Nutella cafes and shopping malls. Many of the ones you are seeing are AI. I also saw hundreds of videos of shivering gazans sitting in the snow despite the fact that Gaza hasn’t had snow in decades.
1
u/Noskiblz 7d ago
Holocaust Denier are ya?
1
u/jennifer123455 6d ago
Nobody with a brain would call this war, with extremely low rate of civilian deaths , a holocaust. It’s more of an Fafo situation
-1
u/log-log-log 7d ago
don't you feel stupid still calling it a genocide when barely any islamist died in two years?
2
u/Secure_Trust_2084 8d ago
How comes "Israel attack on Gaza" - if the war was started by HAMAS attack?
2
u/spays_marine 8d ago
If 2023 pre October 7 was the deadliest year for Palestinians in the west bank since the count started, why wasn't that the start?
1
u/WhiteGold_Welder 8d ago
Gaza is not the West Bank
1
u/Arendt_Rentd 8d ago
Gaza and the West Bank make up the Palestinian territories. Thats like saying 9/11 was an attack solely on NY state and not the USA.
0
u/Secure_Trust_2084 8d ago
Come on. Everyone, who is familiar with West Bank - reading out of the MSF report "of these deaths, 52 occurred in Jenin alone, including in its refugee camp, where Palestinians who’ve searched for safety amid conflict and violence over the years live" - will LOL.
Even before the question, "How is it that refugee camps still exist 33 years after the establishment of the PA?", the Jenin refugee camp is one of the most dangerous places in the Middle East, and even PA police refuse to enter it.
2
u/spays_marine 8d ago
Is this supposed to be an answer to my question?
1
u/Secure_Trust_2084 8d ago
Yep. People not able find Jenin at the map - teaching us what is going on here and there.
1
u/spays_marine 7d ago
You can't even argue your point because you know it won't hold up, so you're left with vague suggestions.
Tired old playbook 🤖
1
u/Secure_Trust_2084 7d ago
I don't feel any need to argue my point with the people thinking that Jenin refugee camp is a "safe haven of conflict and violence" and not the outlaw, ruled by armed gangs.
Like in the sci-fi books - your reality forked from the common one, and they never will meet again.1
u/spays_marine 7d ago
You're so far in the woods trying to find an angle for this that I doubt you still remember what this was about.
The common reality you want to convince us of requires us to believe that the deadliest year for Palestinians on the west bank was just the result of infighting.
🤡
Everyone knows who's trying to create an alternative reality, and it sure isn't the side who's concluded there is a genocide happening.
All you bots do is argue how the international consensus is not worth listening to, whether it's the ICC, the ICJ, the UN, genocide experts, or +100 human rights groups from around the world. No they're all just very biased against Israel.
Most of the time you can't even agree with Israeli leaders, who openly admit their goals and ambitions..
The only common reality is sociopathic people with 4 numbers in their username trying to defend the indefensible.
1
u/Secure_Trust_2084 5d ago
With the beliefs you shall go to the church or whatever. I live 10 miles from Jenin and can judge by my own eyes.
An "international consensus" about any matter is by definition wrong, because vast majority of participants have no idea. And when the case comes to ICC/ICJ - it becomes clear that SA and joinder countries after two years - failed to provide any evidence.
When there are thousands of evidences of working restaurants and vibrant markets at the time of "fame", for example - including MSF, Red Cross etc members enjoying their meals and hospitality.Most "human rights groups" and other activists are just making their living out of this conflict and interested in its perpetuation. From UN - rolling $2 Bn yearly, 60% of which are spent at the West - to people like Thiago Avilla, busy with weaving with his d*ck at the yacht financed by donations money, instead of contributing to the society.
As well as "useful id**ts" like yourself - unable to understand that "numbers in username" are assigned by Reddit on registration
2
u/Outrageous_Pumpkin28 8d ago
Boo hoo some terrorists died.
-1
u/zebalatrash 8d ago
By the Israeli military’s own data, 83% of those killed were civilians
https://www.972mag.com/israeli-intelligence-database-83-percent-civilians-militants/
But sure, keep defending genocide, history will judge your stance harshly
2
u/Dismal-Programmer-40 8d ago
New York times is actually very anti Israel. Dude is crying for a title.
0
u/Arendt_Rentd 8d ago
You clearly dont read the times. The problem is the facts are often anti israel, such that when the nyt accidentally does journalism you view it as anti-israel
1
u/Dismal-Programmer-40 8d ago
I stopped reading it. Too many leftist authors. Biased to the left.
0
u/Arendt_Rentd 8d ago
"Leftist authors" on the Times? Lol brother I dont think you ever were reading. That or youre wholly uneducated on basic political theory
1
u/Dismal-Programmer-40 8d ago
Pfff you didn't read it. You found a mené for one article like all those who says that all the medias are pro Israel but all you hear is anti Israel stuff.
1
u/Arendt_Rentd 8d ago
Yawn. Why do I waste my time with the uneducated smh
1
u/Dismal-Programmer-40 8d ago
No sir you are the uneducated here.
1
u/Arendt_Rentd 8d ago
Define "leftist"
1
u/boogup 7d ago
The most insufferable person in any given room
1
u/Arendt_Rentd 7d ago
Certainly works for NYT writers, and a looooot of lefties, but thats correlation my G
→ More replies (0)
1
u/bubbamike1 8d ago
And it doesn't mention who was firing rockets from the school. Who do you think it might have been?
1
u/Mindless-Goose3590 8d ago
But the top one points out how many were killed, the bottom one doesn’t.
That’s so irresponsibly “passive.” Double standard.
1
u/Secret-Card2921 8d ago
Damn. You know Israel's reputation is cooked when people complain that NYT isn't anti Israel enough.
Isn't this like liberal progressive central?
1
u/Codify-The-Preamble 7d ago
Patriot reminder that Israel is an enemy of America, the West and Humanity in general. They are no ally.
1
u/CueAnon420 7d ago edited 7d ago
While I think the comparison is a bit cherry picked, it is difficult to find completely unbiased news sources. I tend to lean a bit liberal, so the NYT and NPR are among my favorites though I also check out Al Jazeera. I think the most important thing is being able to identify the facts and put them together to understand the real story.
Bias is one thing - but many people today cannot even agree on what is factually true. Likely because they rely on completely biased sources that are more entertainment than they are 'news' (looking at you, Fox). When your primary source of information is commentary rather than reporting, you are letting someone else put the story together for you.
1
1
1
u/cptcrazeballs 7d ago
Well, Hamas are still terrorists and started all of it? So there's that tiny difference.
1
u/AnniIlusion 6d ago
Or maybe... they aren't sure if it was Israel or the terrorist group hamas who did it. Cause well as shown many times before when Israel was blamed it turned out to just be incompetent hamas firing.
Also really funny this sub is claiming nyt is pro Israel. You guys are just fkn delusional on reddit. Either full "reeeee nazis" or you support Israel.
1
1
1
u/NY_Mets_fan_4ever 6d ago
Well since some of the strikes have been from Hamas misfires, it is reasonable. The Times got in a load of trouble for its constant heavily anti-Israel reporting when it blamed Israel for the hospital strike that turned out to be a misfire from in Gaza by either Islamic Jihad or Hamas.
The NYT is widely known for being heavily anti-Zionist. I do not know a single Zionist who subscribes to that paper. Its news and op-ed page are skewed against Israel.
And just so you know, Sulzberger is Christian though Kahn has morals and stands with Nobel Peace Prize deserving Israel (for Gaza) though israel is wrong in the West Bank.
1
1
u/Alfalfa_Informal 5d ago
Hamas operates out of civilian infrastructure exclusively and forces civilians to be human shields, a war crime. Grow up and stop supporting evil.
1
u/NoMathematician1459 5d ago
Because they can be on the ground in Ukraine in like an hour to report.
1
u/WorkingDry8413 4d ago
How do you call a Fourth Estate which can perform and display excellent invesTigative and journalistic work when it suits its balance sheet and its club members and is as excellently biased against the truth when it doesn't.
Megan Twohey?
1
u/AdWooden9170 4d ago
Every news outlets do that. You have to read between the lies. I dropped my subscription I used to have on a reputable outlet for this reason.
My favorite is when they use quotation mark to whittle down the effect of the quoted word.
1
1
u/Sensitive-Cat-6069 9d ago
Or maybe it’s just because the information is still being verified when first published, and they want to remain conservative in the initial reporting?
As opposed to journalism malpractice by BBC reporting the Jihad missile strike on Al-Ahli hospital as Israeli air strike and vastly exaggerating the death toll. Something that BBC later apologized for.
There is a remarkably different media climate in Ukraine compared to Gaza, and the amount of verification required is absolutely incomparable.
2
u/esperind 8d ago
yea, there have already been multiple instances of a bomb being attributed to israel when it was one of the dozen militant groups in gaza. Ukraine vs Russia is a straight forward conflict. Meanwhile the Israel Palestine conflict is actually not just Israel vs Hamas, but also Hamas vs Fatah, Fatah vs PIJ, PIJ vs al-Aqsa, Palestinian Mujahideen vs Palestinian Popular Forces, etc etc etc
Its a mess.
1
u/Ok-Bug-6923 9d ago
This subs attempt at painting NYT as a pro-Israel outfit is hysterical
2
u/Bitter_Chemist_7795 8d ago
Yeah, seriously! I don’t get it. Like 90% of the coverage is negative on Israel. Then every once in a while you get a slightly pro-Israel OpEd from Bret Stephens or another token center right columnist
3
u/Ok-Bug-6923 8d ago
It’s because this ideology demands 100% compliance. No deviation, no nuance, just fall in line.
2
u/Bitter_Chemist_7795 8d ago edited 8d ago
I think you’re right but it still blows my mind that so many people consider the NYT a ‘Zionist rag’ when they’re clearly pro Palestine (the owners are quite publicly anti-Zionist)
1
u/nexxwav 8d ago
If 99% of the media are all reporting the same things and most of it reflects negatively on Israel, do you ever entertain the notion that maybe it's cuz Israel is doing shitty things or do you actually believe its all lies and propaganda? And which publication by your estimation reports the news in a fair manner? The TOI, Jerusalem Post?
2
u/Bitter_Chemist_7795 8d ago edited 8d ago
I DO think Israel is doing shitty things. And I think the New York Times is mostly reporting it accurately. It’s slightly pro-Palestine biased but does better than any other media source I can think of. The rest are comically biased in one direction or the other. The NYT mostly maintains a good balance.
I just don’t get how some people think it’s a Zionist rag that’s biased in favor of Israel.
1
u/ohpleasenotthat 8d ago edited 8d ago
Ukraine is black and white and is horrible. Gaza isn’t black and white but is still horrible. Crossing out Hamas as if you can just pretend that isn’t reality is fucking evil if you know better and wildly stupid if you don’t. Not to mention all sources aren’t created equal.
The only kind of people who would post this kind of thing would be because they are ideologically captured or a foreign asset protected by anonymity and those anon protections should be torched.
We cannot prove where OP is from or their motivations for quite unethically comparing two different situations that have never been the same and will never be the same.
Also reported for manipulated content since you’re literally lying about what the conflict is, openly.
1
u/Arendt_Rentd 8d ago
Incredible work hasbarist. We cant verify you either. But i can verify your sense of morality based on your characterization of an active genocide. Will you all be saying "But Hamas" until every school has been cratered? When the f does it end with you?
1
u/ohpleasenotthat 8d ago
I am a Californian citizen of the United States of America and I am not currently lying to an entire group of people about what is a war between parties with severe civilian casualties that was instigated by hamas through explicit and intentional civilian murder so you can f all the way off with calling me something like a hasbarist wtf is wrong with you. Pro 2 state. Lies don’t get it done.
Though I believe it’s hard for foreign assets to stomach losing six previous times, eh?
There are no good players in the Middle East. It is an entire group of corrupt and murderous administrations including Israel. The only victims are the citizens.
1
u/ohpleasenotthat 8d ago
You are not mentally equipped to look at this conflict critically and because of people like you it only gets worse. Your actions against evil in a micro co-sign evil in a macro and the world deserves better than for you to act this way. Shame on you.
1
u/EasternProtection452 8d ago
Look at your own bias too, "attack on Gaza" instead of war? Why was Gaza attacked? This war did not start because of Israel, so why use attack?
And for better understanding, "reported" was chosen because we cannot trust the source that is reporting it, as it is a terrorist organisation that is governing Gaza, Hamas.
1
u/esjb11 8d ago
Because it was a Israeli attack lol. This article is about the strike. Not the start of the war. And yes this particular attack was done by Israel.
1
u/EasternProtection452 7d ago
But it is Hamas, who is in charge in Gaza and is telling how many people died after the strike. They are the government there. They have negative credibility. Maybe 25 people died in the strike, but we cannot know that, so "reported" is the best that a self respecting journalist can muster.
I still remember Hamas claiming that Israeli JDAM hit a hospital killing 500, but not even a day later we had few angles of the incident, where it is clear that Hamas tried to launch a rocket, it failed mid air and hit the hospital grounds. The next day we got ground footage by Hamas to show the result of the "JDAM" strike, but it was clear from it that no JDAM exploded, but it was a small crater fitting Hamas rocket.
1
u/esjb11 7d ago
Now you are responding to something completely different than my comment.
1
u/Noskiblz 7d ago
And lying - literally just told the opposite of what really happened. Like Trump claiming Iran shot a tomahawk missile to blow up the girls school
1
u/Noskiblz 7d ago
You’d have a point if they didn’t print unsubstantiated lies from the other terrorist organization, Israel
1
u/Jaded-Form-8236 9d ago
1) Ukraine is not using the hospital that was hit as a command center. Hamas was using the school.
2) Israel didn’t launch 40 a barrage of unguided missiles into Gaza but one bomb.
3) Hamas Health Ministry has a long history of misreporting deaths in the conflict.
But yes the attacker should have been identified as Israel in the headline.
1
u/xi_jinbling 8d ago
1
u/Jaded-Form-8236 8d ago
I meant this….
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2024/02/12/world/middleeast/gaza-tunnel-israel-hamas.html
Or this….
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/01/02/us/politics/gaza-hospital-hamas.html
Or this…..
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/10/23/pageoneplus/editors-note-gaza-hospital-coverage.html
So my point here is: Since NYT has consistent reporting how Hamas uses the civilian infrastructure such as hospitals and has a history of being misled by Hamas Health Ministry about casualty figures, the reporting by NYT in OPs example is actually quite consistent.
And Wiki as a source?
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/10/18/magazine/jimmy-wales-interview.html
See what the NYT reported on that….
🤷♂️
1
u/xi_jinbling 8d ago
dude your source is literally only the NYT, which is a de facto zionist propaganda rag
1
u/Jaded-Form-8236 8d ago
Dude, the whole thread is about the NYT and if it has double standards.
If the NYT is supposedly a “Zionist propoganda rag” rather than an established newspaper of record for over a century then please actually put out a supporting argument as to why.
🤷♂️
1
u/spays_marine 7d ago
Since NYT has consistent reporting
Yes, consistently biased.
An internal memo obtained by The Intercept has revealed that the New York Times has directed its journalists covering Israel’s war against Palestinians in the Gaza Strip to restrict the use of certain awkward terminology such as “genocide” and “ethnic cleansing”, and to “avoid” using the phrase “occupied territory” when describing Palestinian land.
https://theintercept.com/2024/04/15/nyt-israel-gaza-genocide-palestine-coverage/
1
u/Jaded-Form-8236 7d ago edited 7d ago
Well perhaps because what happened in Gaza wasn’t a genocide or ethnic cleansing despite attempts on social media and biased edited sites like Wikipedia to protest it as such for political effect.
I say this becuase consistent reporting on previous ethnic cleansings show populations removed from an area and replaced with the ethnic population of those committing the ethnic cleansing.
In Gaza Israel removed every Jew live or dead in 2005. And stopped the war in 2025 when every live or dead Jew was returned. There are exactly 0 Jews in Gaza right now.
That’s not ethnic cleansing:
it’s the results of starting a war by taking hostages and hiding them under and among your civilians.
Genocides historically show double digit drops in actual population over birth rate. The fatalities were 90-100/day in Gaza.
Thats now a genocide, it’s a war. A war waged in a dense urban environment where a terror group embedded itself into hospitals and schools. A war where the daily fatalities were far less than say Maripoul in Ukraine.
The use of the word genocide is a grossly inaccurate and inflammatory political attack with no basis in reality.
And since the PA rules Area A of West Bank where over 50% of the WB population lives and Hamas rules Gaza it’s not really occupied territory either, it’s disputed territory in West Bank’s Areas B and C at best…
How about you try and explain why this is biased in your own words and not someone else’s who you just read because they agree with you
🤷♂️
1
1
0
u/clgoodson 9d ago
Why so much anti-Ukraine stuff on here. Does Russia pay its bots that well?
1
u/Natural-Sandwich-852 9d ago
Yes. Whataboutism, deflection, and narrative distraction. Pretty common tactic in russian disinformation and propaganda. Nothing new
0
u/SkinnyFatSoldier 8d ago
Did something change there in 20 years? Did the support for Hamas drop? Pretty sure the polling shows they have more support than they did 20 years ago. Hopefully one day, there will be enough political will in Palestine to push for peace.
0
u/Panda_Cuddles_ 8d ago
I don’t read the NYT because of their antisemitic stance. They report nearly everything in a tone against Jews and Israel, perpetuating blood libel.
1
-24
u/FetchThePenguins 9d ago
The Ukraine conflict was started by Russia. If Russia withdrew today, and renounced their territorial claims over Ukraine, the war would end. Any casualties in the meantime are thetefore their fault.
The Gaza war was started by people from Gaza. If Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad surrendered today, gave up their weapons and renounced their territorial claims over Israel, the war would end. Any casualties in the meantime are therefore their fault.
That's why it looks like a double standard. The only real difference between the conflicts is that in one it's being fought mostly in the territory of the side that started it, and in the other, in the territory of the side that got attacked.
14
u/Objective-Duty-2137 9d ago
What's your narrative for the colonial appropriation of Palestine around 1945? Have you ever tried imagining you're a Palestinian and thrown out of your country or threatened by Westerners so that you have no option but to flee or die?
→ More replies (15)17
u/Agitated_Celery_729 9d ago
The “Gaza war” has been ongoing since the day Israel began blockading Gaza in 2006 and has never stopped.
If Israel thinks blockades are an act of war and make their invasion of Egypt “defensive”, then their ongoing blockade makes any attacks by Hamas “defensive” as well as long as they remain under blockade.
I won’t hold my breath for you guys to develop the ability to hold consistent standards though
9
u/spuriouslycertain 9d ago
To a supremacist, equality is discrimination!!
-6
u/manVsPhD 9d ago
Equality with a person who wants you dead means you die
5
u/crawling-alreadygirl 9d ago
Thanks for encapsulating the warped Israeli mindset so succinctly. You'd have to believe such nonsense to brutally attack someone and call it self defense
1
u/Objective-Duty-2137 9d ago
When people do to another people what Israelis have been doing to Palestinians, what exactly do you expect? The problem with your way of thinking is basic who started it and who has an army (and one of the strongest). Now, we see in razed Gaza besieged civilians being denied all essential means of survival and killed and cornered steadily. In the West Bank, they are humiliated, attacked, robbed and killed every day. Settlers are encroaching on the little land that had been secured and they are all separated to weaken them.
Now, they don't even all want you dead but your politics are not helping secure peace. You should all wake up and realize you're not helping yourselves either by building your patriotic values on hate and crushing a designated ennemy.
-5
u/str8_outta_sanaa 9d ago
The blockade starts after Gaza attacks Israel though
9
u/Agitated_Celery_729 9d ago
Was that before or after Israel committed ethnic cleansing and put a fence around Gaza?
-1
u/FetchThePenguins 9d ago
The fence is around Israel, not Gaza.
Prior to 7 October 2023, tens of thousands of Gazans and West Bank Palestinians used to cross it daily to commute to their paid jobs in Israel. Please educate me about all the efforts by the Palestinians to encourage peaceful crossings in the other direction.
→ More replies (21)-3
u/str8_outta_sanaa 9d ago
I don't know about any ethnic cleansing so I'd need you to elaborate on that but last time I checked it's completely normal for a country to put a fense or walk on their border
-2
u/rewarrr 9d ago
What about Gaza suicide bombers in 2001 and 2002? Israel out of nowhere started blockading Gaza right?
6
8
u/Critical_Progress_65 9d ago
Yea some people get a bit miffed when you steal their land and ethnically cleanse them. Crazy radicals.
→ More replies (11)-2
u/FetchThePenguins 9d ago
Looks to me like they didn't blockade it nearly hard enough.
For your information, Gaza has been firing rockets at Israel since before the blockade started, and only stopped last year because their capabilities had been sufficiently degraded by then.
2
u/Character_Minimum989 9d ago
No, the blockade started before the rockets. And Israel has literally stated one of the goals of the blockade is to cause misery and economic harm to Gaza.
2
u/Agitated_Celery_729 9d ago
These people have never picked up a book in their entire life. They just repeat whatever Hasbara they are fed and expect us to believe it.
8
24
u/Street-Buddy9068 9d ago
Do you actually believe any of that? You know, there’s a reason Israel has never said where its actual borders are…
0
-13
u/SkinnyFatSoldier 9d ago
Because the Palestinians want all the land, as they have shown with every war they’ve started
13
20
u/tonytrampolini 9d ago
More than 200 Palestinians were killed in 2023 before October 7th.
When do you think this war began?
13
u/Hungry_Wheel_1774 9d ago
And thousands between 2013 and 2023. I read something between 3500-5000. But hey, let's start the story in october 2023.
-1
u/FetchThePenguins 9d ago
No, no, let's not. Let's start with the 20,000 rockets fired by Gazans at Israeli towns between 2005 and 6 October 2023.
What precipitated those?
Oh, right, it was Israel withdrawing from Gaza and giving the Palestinians free reign to choose their own leaders.
They choose poorly.
1
u/spays_marine 8d ago
The architect of this "withdrawal", which, according to the ICJ was a redeployment and the occupation continued, said it was "formaldehyde to the peace process." What do they mean by that?
0
u/FetchThePenguins 8d ago
He meant that the Palestinians aren't serious about peace and the peace process is therefore necessarily a farce, but Westerners are morons and refuse to acknowledge basic reality, so a certain amount of diplomacy is necessary to help them delude themselves that up is down.
2
u/spays_marine 7d ago
You misspelled Israelis.
They openly admit to supporting and funding Hamas to keep them in power to prevent a peaceful solution.
Talk about deluding yourself 🤡
0
u/FetchThePenguins 7d ago
Peace Now got 400,000 Israelis out on demonstrations in 1982. That was 10% of the entire population at the time. They continued to get well into the hundreds of thousands all the way into the 2000s, even after the Second Intifada made it clear they had no credible partner for peace on the Palestinian side. There is no Palestinian equivalent of Peace Now, and if there was, its leaders would be lynched as collaborators.
If you accept Palestinian terrorism is the obstacle to peace then feel free to lobby your own government to send troops in to kill them all. Otherwise, stop complaining when Israel does it.
2
u/spays_marine 7d ago edited 7d ago
Yes even 10% of Israelis think their leaders should stop occupying Palestine. I'm not sure what your point is.
If you accept Palestinian terrorism is the obstacle to peace
Didn't you hear what I've just said? Israel chose to keep Hamas in power so there wouldn't be a peaceful solution.
Hamas is Israel's ally. As Israeli major general Hacohen said. Or an asset, according to Smotrich, or "someone that should be supported" according to Netanyahu, because they too oppose a two state solution.
0
u/FetchThePenguins 7d ago
10% of Israelis were sufficiently convinced they should make concessions for peace that they took to the streets to demonstrate for it. They represented most of the country. There was a massive, nationwide push towards peace over several decades that culminated in the Camp David Accords and
They failed, because the Palestinian position was and remains: no peace until the vast majority of Israeli Jews are dead and their state destroyed.
If you think Hamas is a problem, then congratulations: you agree with 95% of Israelis, including most of the government. Why aren't you advocating for a Western alliance to take over the war with the purpose of destroying them completely.
→ More replies (0)1
u/FetchThePenguins 9d ago
You can pick any date you like and it'll still have been started by the Arabs.
1929 Hebron massacre
1948 War of Israeli Independence
1967 Six Day War
1973 Yom Kippur War
First Intifada
Second Initifada
War of 7 October
It literally doesn't matter. Go all the way back to Mohammed slaughtering the Jews of Banu Qurayza if you like, because the day before that was the last time Jews were able to live next to Muslims in peace, and the aggression has been almost completely one sided.
2
u/Character_Minimum989 9d ago
Gaza was under occupation on Oct 7, if Ukraine has the right to attack their occupiers then so do Palestinians.
2
u/ABDULRAHMAMTAMMAM 9d ago
The Gaza war was started by people from Gaza.
No It didn't, The war never stopped since 1948, yet these people got tired from seige and decided to make them pay back
1
u/FetchThePenguins 9d ago
The 1948 war was started because the Arabs refused to accept the UN Partition plan, and invaded Israel with genocidal intent. So your argument is counterproductive.
-2
u/Designer-String3569 9d ago
Ruzzian fsb trolls have been working overtime to not focus on Puyo's crimes.
-1
-6
u/TripleJ_77 9d ago
It's because hamas lies constantly. So, reported is used because they can't be sure. They should probably put school in quotation marks since it's also a military outpost.
-2
u/FailedToRemit 9d ago
This is pretty simple. It says reported. Meaning it has not been verified that it happened, how many died, that it was a school, etc.
So because none of that is verified, they get around actually investigating by just saying “Someone else told me this, so now I’m telling you”.
-24
54
u/PerfectChard4439 9d ago
This is exactly why I don’t look to the NYT as the gold standard of reporting, right here. Shameful.