I guess the stories of CNN offering a human sacrifice to Trump was on the money.
Western mainstream media is entirely captured by Apartheid Israel and his propoganda arm. Right wing media willingly and Liberal media (sometimes) reluctantly, same outcome.
Media that comes out of Apartheid Israel will often express truths that are completely off the table for even the likes of The BBC and The Guardian.
That's not strictly true. I do feel the tide is slowly turning. I watched World CNN the other day and there was a Jewish guest on, he was pro Netenyahu but he said that Netenyahu has broken the ceasefire as had been his intentions all along to hide the sackings he had made in his government and to distract from his charges and court cases and to prolong or even postpone them indefinitely.
I was absolutely shocked hearing and seeing that he said on Western Media. I just hoped it was the start and that other outlets would follow suit and stop blindly supporting Israel at every turn.
Guy you were radicalised by fecking Sam Harris.You’d have to be getting all your news from deep within a specific Twitter echo chamber to think they won’t report on Israeli aggression. It’s also a bit of a side show anyway. BBC/Guardian coverage makes feck all difference to the breakdown in the ceasefire. Which has been massively influenced by the orange turd in the White House. But maybe blaming anyone in the US who isn’t Biden causes too much cognitive dissonance, hence lashing out at these media outlets instead?
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023...za-bbc-journalists-accuse-broadcaster-of-biasIn a 2,300-word letter written to Al Jazeera by eight UK-based journalists employed by the corporation, the BBC is also said to be guilty of a “double standard in how civilians are seen”, given that it is “unflinching” in its reporting of alleged Russian war crimes in Ukraine.
Guy you were radicalised by fecking Sam Harris.
https://www.declassifieduk.org/bbc-guardian-editors-private-meetings-with-israeli-general-kohavi/Israel’s former top military officer, General Aviv Kohavi held private meetings with the editors of major British news organisations one month after the Gaza bombing began, Declassified can reveal.
The meetings took place with Katherine Viner, editor-in-chief of the Guardian, Richard Burgess, director of news content at the BBC, and Roula Khalaf, editor of the Financial Times.
As well as the BBC and Guardian responses stating a similar principle.Reacting to our investigation, professor Freedman told Declassified: “Obviously off the record briefings have a place in journalism.
Intention of Israel to influence from the article:A journalist who was working for the BBC at the time of the visit told Declassified: “I don’t recall any internal correspondence about the meeting, which the BBC would ordinarily send out if there was a high profile visit of this kind. I also find it very difficult to believe that the organisation would hold an equivalent meeting with the Hamas government”.
The journalist, who requested anonymity, added: “Not only is Kohavi’s visit unprecedented but it’s also outrageous that one of the most senior editors at the BBC should court company with a
foreign military figure in this way, especially one whose country stands accused of serious human rights violations.
“It further undermines the independence and impartiality that the BBC claims to uphold, and I think it has done irreparable damage to any trust audiences had in the corporation”.
In planning documents for the November 2023 trip, IDF lieutenant colonel (reserve) Gad Yishayahu noted how “visits by high-ranking Israeli dignitaries to Western countries will help influence various target audiences and thereby enhance the trend of support for Israel”.
The point still holds. Meeting people from Israel or Hamas for off the record briefings is fine and normal. If they influence journalists in a way that compromises accuracy then obviously that's a different thing and clearly an issue. Of course the Israeli general is going to try and spin his message, but it's for the journalist to see through that and use the access to try and get information on the military's plans and objectives.Which is what was also communicated in the article you are referring to. So you're just repeating an already established principle of agreement.
As well as the BBC and Guardian responses stating a similar principle.
Quite clearly that isn't the issue. The article makes clear that the concern amongst journalists, including those who work for these outlets, and other media observers, is that outside pressure is being applied to the journalistic and editorial output and that that political pressure is being caved to. As well as stating the unusual nature of the meeting.
Concern from BBC journalist from the article:
Intention of Israel to influence from the article: