A community for discussing events around the World
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
It's sickening how these outlets literally side with a government against their own innocent murdered workers. Some of them would literally side against their lived experience if they narrowly escaped and lived to talk about it. All for a country that perfectly personifies the term "cry-bully."
It's also sick how the media just moves on despite the repeated targeted murders of their colleagues.
I just went and read the article, I see nothing wrong with the headline or their reporting. The article is full of refutations of Israel’s claim and is clear that none of Israel’s claims have been corroborated.
Reuters is a newswire. They’re always going to report what the parties involved are saying in a dry and dispassionate manner. Not everything needs to be an editorial. They do the same thing when it comes to Russian attacks in Ukraine. They’ll share what TASS is saying while noting that they cannot corroborate the narrative.
Probably because the article and the headline were not created by the same person. Putting Israel's claim in the headline puts its legitimacy above all others and makes it the default narrative. Given their consistent dishonesty, Reuters should know better. Especially when it comes to a (former?) employee.
Yeah I recall people getting similarly mad at them using Russian claims in the headline. Definitely not best practice from my POV.
They should not be repeating lies.
I can understand that view, but I think it’s newsworthy to know what a government is claiming in order to be able to refute the claim. As I said, the article makes it very clear that nothing the Israeli government has claimed is verified and they cite multiple sources that counter Israel’s narrative.
So Reuters reported that Israel bombed the hospital on purpose because they saw a camera right?
It would also be prudent to mention that Israel has a history of lying about this particular topic. They didn't have any issues making that claim attachment when Russia was encroaching on Crimea, and the Kremlin was denying it.
I just went back to some 2014 articles about Crimea and I’m not finding what you’re referencing, can you give me a hand?
A claim not published needs no refutation.
Reporting what people say is the domain of gossip magazines. Report the facts of what people do.
The claim is published by Israel regardless of whether or not Reuters reports it. Reporting what governments say is the job of the media as the fourth estate, imo.
Reporting what governments say is the job of the media as the fourth estate, imo.
Not exactly. To paraphrase the well known example, the job of the fourth estate is not to say "the government says it's raining". It is to look outside and tell us if the government is telling the truth.
What you describe isn't how it always was. News have grown accustomed to skating by with nothing but police statements, for the most obvious example, to make very bold claims. The obsession with being early and the risk of bucking the system of power only to be proven wrong later has been crippling for media integrity.
Better late than never i guess.
Thank you for posting this, OP.