Nothing says, "we've done nothing wrong," quite like banning journalists who disagree with you.
In the article, it also says that at some point not too long ago, Israel killed one of their journalists.
Shireen Abu Akleh. There's a video showing what happened leading up to her death.
And there's a video of the IDF attacking her funeral
An Israeli sniper ""accidentally"" shot her
They're the propaganda arm of Doha, the same government that protects Hamas leadership. They've repeatedly printed Hamas lies without fact checking. Why would Israel not ban their propaganda outlet? Calling them journalists when they don't adhere to basic journalistic standards is ludicrous. This isn't new either. They've been acting this way forever. Lying about the hospital bombing was just the last straw.
Lies like the 40 beheaded babies that the entire western media spread?
Israel literally kills journalists.
Lies like the 40 beheaded babies that the entire western media spread?
"Lies" in this case means "reported on claims made by actual Israeli soldiers without sufficient cross-checking, but explicitly walked back pretty much immediately", plus there are non-Israeli sources (at least one french journalist-editor and czech ambassador) who specifically say that they were shown the actual photos of beheaded babies and cross-checked them (the number 40 seems to be bullshit, but iirc most media did not report that and these people did not claim that either).
Next to that is Al Jazeera whose purpose for existing is to spread Qatari world of view by reporting relatively objectively on most things to gain trust and spreading pure propaganda on issues like most things related to Israel.
It really isn't all that similar.
So random rumors spread by soldiers should be treated as truth (because its pro-team Israel ) but reporting on what the ministry of health of gaza, officials in israel, and random israel soldiers all confirm is spreading baseless lies (because it is anti-team Israel)?
No denying AJ doesn't spread propaganda. But if Israel wants to stop propganda, maybe they should start by getting rid of their officials and soldiers, who are spreading the rumors in the first place?
So random rumors spread by soldiers should be treated as truth (because its pro-team Israel )
I thought that my quote on what happened in that case pretty clearly implied that it was a screw-up. Nevertheless, it was a relatively short-lived screw up which, unlike the claims of 500 killed by a supposed Israeli strike on a hospital, didn't seem to do any damage apart from slightly lessening the trustworthiness of media or Israel for some people.
reporting on what the ministry of health of gaza, officials in israel, and random israel soldiers all confirm
If you're talking about the hospital strike, I haven't seen anyone but the ministry of health of Gaza say what they said, and the ministry of health of Gaza is de facto Hamas. I do see Hamas, a terrorist organization, as implicitly less trustworthy than IDF, even though I don't trust everything IDF says, yes.
Yeah man, nothing happened except succeeding in dehumanizing Palestinians and Muslims, which resulted in a man in the US to stab a Palestinian woman, and kill her 6 year old son by stabbing him 26 times with a 7 inch knife while screaming "ALL MUSLIMS MUST DIE".
Nothing important really.
So you didn't even bother looking at the sources for the claim you make fun of?
Given members of the IDF have supported the idea that it was an intentional attract to get Hamas hiding in the hospital from the moment it happened, why don't you believe the IDF members and Hamas when they agree that it was an Israeli attack? I don't even believe it was an Israeli attack* and this incident just further demonstrates the IDF members and Israeli officials will just make up stuff to bolster their side even when they have no actual information. There's no reason to believe either side imo.
*The worst case is Israel defended themselves against a missile and the payload from the middle happened to fall on a hospital because a terrorist group was too incompetent to make sure that a hospital wasn't directly under the trajectory. I don't think someone having an incoming missile has any obligation to first check what happens to be under the missile at the time before destroying said missile, so it's still doesn't make Israel look bad imo like some people are claiming.
What's more likely?
That a news outlet appears totally committed to the most objective possible view on any issue ever except for exactly this.
Or
Maybe you might be wrong sometimes as humans are not infallible.
Both are entirely possible, even at once. Also it's not just "exactly this", it's generally a broader range of topics. And, to nitpick a bit, "relatively objectively" is not the same as "totally committed to the most objective possible view".
For another example of the former, as the guy below you says, years ago this was the exact modus operandi of (the english version of) Russia Today, until it reoriented and started targeting straight up pro-russian conspiracy nuts. Sputnik I think was always a bit out there, but I'm honestly not sure.
Yeah man, nothing happened except succeeding in dehumanizing Palestinians and Muslims, which resulted in a man in the US to stab a Palestinian woman, and kill her 6 year old son by stabbing him 26 times with a 7 inch knife while screaming "ALL MUSLIMS MUST DIE".
Nothing important really.
As criminal as that is, I'm pretty sure burned babies and slaughtered and likely tortured civilians were enough for that.
So, you acknowledge that Israel lied about beheaded babies, what makes you think they didn't lie about burned babies?
As far as I know, they released some of those photos publicly. I rely on word of others because I have no interest in seeing it, you can google it yourself.
No, they didn't.
You are just content with being fed propaganda and lies and are willing to spread them without verifying them.
This is sad. I know Al Jazeera is owned by Qatar and has a POV but Al Jazeera English, at least, has had excellent, on-the-ground reporting. In the U.S., all the cable news channels were just having pundits speculate based on no reporting or doing useless interviews with politicians trying to be the most pro-Israel.
I basically put on every channel at some point during the crisis and the best English-language reporting was Al Jazeera English along with the BBC for some stuff. They weren’t getting facts wrong and they have bureaus all over the Middle East (including Gaza) so they were breaking stories while other outlets were still trying to get reporters briefed and to the region.
Hmm sounds suspiciously similar to another country that bans any media that isn't state-controlled...
Nothing says, "we've done nothing wrong," quite like banning journalists who disagree with you.
In the article, it also says that at some point not too long ago, Israel killed one of their journalists.
Shireen Abu Akleh. There's a video showing what happened leading up to her death.
And there's a video of the IDF attacking her funeral
An Israeli sniper ""accidentally"" shot her
They're the propaganda arm of Doha, the same government that protects Hamas leadership. They've repeatedly printed Hamas lies without fact checking. Why would Israel not ban their propaganda outlet? Calling them journalists when they don't adhere to basic journalistic standards is ludicrous. This isn't new either. They've been acting this way forever. Lying about the hospital bombing was just the last straw.
Lies like the 40 beheaded babies that the entire western media spread?
Israel literally kills journalists.
"Lies" in this case means "reported on claims made by actual Israeli soldiers without sufficient cross-checking, but explicitly walked back pretty much immediately", plus there are non-Israeli sources (at least one french journalist-editor and czech ambassador) who specifically say that they were shown the actual photos of beheaded babies and cross-checked them (the number 40 seems to be bullshit, but iirc most media did not report that and these people did not claim that either).
Next to that is Al Jazeera whose purpose for existing is to spread Qatari world of view by reporting relatively objectively on most things to gain trust and spreading pure propaganda on issues like most things related to Israel.
It really isn't all that similar.
So random rumors spread by soldiers should be treated as truth (because its pro-team Israel ) but reporting on what the ministry of health of gaza, officials in israel, and random israel soldiers all confirm is spreading baseless lies (because it is anti-team Israel)?
No denying AJ doesn't spread propaganda. But if Israel wants to stop propganda, maybe they should start by getting rid of their officials and soldiers, who are spreading the rumors in the first place?
I thought that my quote on what happened in that case pretty clearly implied that it was a screw-up. Nevertheless, it was a relatively short-lived screw up which, unlike the claims of 500 killed by a supposed Israeli strike on a hospital, didn't seem to do any damage apart from slightly lessening the trustworthiness of media or Israel for some people.
If you're talking about the hospital strike, I haven't seen anyone but the ministry of health of Gaza say what they said, and the ministry of health of Gaza is de facto Hamas. I do see Hamas, a terrorist organization, as implicitly less trustworthy than IDF, even though I don't trust everything IDF says, yes.
Yeah man, nothing happened except succeeding in dehumanizing Palestinians and Muslims, which resulted in a man in the US to stab a Palestinian woman, and kill her 6 year old son by stabbing him 26 times with a 7 inch knife while screaming "ALL MUSLIMS MUST DIE".
Nothing important really.
So you didn't even bother looking at the sources for the claim you make fun of?
Given members of the IDF have supported the idea that it was an intentional attract to get Hamas hiding in the hospital from the moment it happened, why don't you believe the IDF members and Hamas when they agree that it was an Israeli attack? I don't even believe it was an Israeli attack* and this incident just further demonstrates the IDF members and Israeli officials will just make up stuff to bolster their side even when they have no actual information. There's no reason to believe either side imo.
*The worst case is Israel defended themselves against a missile and the payload from the middle happened to fall on a hospital because a terrorist group was too incompetent to make sure that a hospital wasn't directly under the trajectory. I don't think someone having an incoming missile has any obligation to first check what happens to be under the missile at the time before destroying said missile, so it's still doesn't make Israel look bad imo like some people are claiming.
What's more likely?
That a news outlet appears totally committed to the most objective possible view on any issue ever except for exactly this.
Or
Maybe you might be wrong sometimes as humans are not infallible.
Both are entirely possible, even at once. Also it's not just "exactly this", it's generally a broader range of topics. And, to nitpick a bit, "relatively objectively" is not the same as "totally committed to the most objective possible view".
For another example of the former, as the guy below you says, years ago this was the exact modus operandi of (the english version of) Russia Today, until it reoriented and started targeting straight up pro-russian conspiracy nuts. Sputnik I think was always a bit out there, but I'm honestly not sure.
Yeah man, nothing happened except succeeding in dehumanizing Palestinians and Muslims, which resulted in a man in the US to stab a Palestinian woman, and kill her 6 year old son by stabbing him 26 times with a 7 inch knife while screaming "ALL MUSLIMS MUST DIE".
Nothing important really.
As criminal as that is, I'm pretty sure burned babies and slaughtered and likely tortured civilians were enough for that.
So, you acknowledge that Israel lied about beheaded babies, what makes you think they didn't lie about burned babies?
As far as I know, they released some of those photos publicly. I rely on word of others because I have no interest in seeing it, you can google it yourself.
No, they didn't.
You are just content with being fed propaganda and lies and are willing to spread them without verifying them.
https://twitter.com/IsraeliPM/status/1712471782303867144
Page doesn't exist.
Try logging in bro, it's just marked as sensitive content for obvious reason.
If whatabautism about the other side propaganda is your best response to defend their journalistic integrity I don’t think you have an argument
Israel didn't just ban Al Jazeera, they also killed their reporter, Shireen Abu Akleh.
Have you condemned them for killing her?
Israel is out there killing reporters (which is a war crime), and you guys here are talking about biased media?
since you double down on not having any way to defend their integrity and derail by asking if i condemned I'll do the same.
Have you apologized for condemning israel for the "hospital bombing"?
No, because Israel did it.
Thanks for showing your true colors. Blocked.
Lmao. Go live in your echo chamber.
This is sad. I know Al Jazeera is owned by Qatar and has a POV but Al Jazeera English, at least, has had excellent, on-the-ground reporting. In the U.S., all the cable news channels were just having pundits speculate based on no reporting or doing useless interviews with politicians trying to be the most pro-Israel.
I basically put on every channel at some point during the crisis and the best English-language reporting was Al Jazeera English along with the BBC for some stuff. They weren’t getting facts wrong and they have bureaus all over the Middle East (including Gaza) so they were breaking stories while other outlets were still trying to get reporters briefed and to the region.
Hmm sounds suspiciously similar to another country that bans any media that isn't state-controlled...
Middle-East Eye:
Al Jazeera:
Qatar:
And:
And: