•  mozz   ( @mozz@mbin.grits.dev ) OP
      link
      fedilink
      26
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      Dude Al Jazeera’s fuckin fantastic

      It is quite literally the only news I’m aware of which is (1) fairly big and professional, competent (2) not automatically pro-Western on everything (3) not run by some government, and filled with stories about how that government’s great and any bad stories about it are evil lies

      • Uhm… This is a joke, right?

        Al Jazeera is the Qatari government. The stateargely responsible for the funding of Hamas, and the believed home of Hamas leadership.

        I can’t imagine this comment you made was done in good faith. Or are you that ignorant?

        •  mozz   ( @mozz@mbin.grits.dev ) OP
          link
          fedilink
          9
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          Innuendo Studios calls this The Ship of Theseus – taking individual half-truths and stringing them together into a long line to construct an aggregate statement that bears no resemblance to the truth.

          Al Jazeera is the Qatari government.

          * partly owned by the Qatari government

          The stateargely responsible for the funding of Hamas

          * responsible for maybe a third of the funding of Hamas ever since it was given the blessing of the Netanyahu government to do so

          the believed home of Hamas leadership.

          Not seeing the connection. “Some of Hamas’s horrible and corrupt leaders live in Qatar, therefore a news outlet funded partly by the government of Qatar is obviously compromised.” I mean, Jared Kushner lives in Florida. Does that mean something about the Miami Herald (or would it, if DeSantis was partially funding it)?

          I don’t think it’s a secret that Al Jazeera has a generally pro-Arab and anti-Israeli viewpoint. I said they were fuckin fantastic and listed some reasons; I didn’t say they were totally free from bias / free from having a viewpoint. But even their stories directly on the Gaza war (the most slanted selection of stuff you’ll be able to find) are actually pretty factual to me. An example is this story about the Hamas rape claims. It’s a little slanted. I don’t agree with “while isolated rapes may have taken place, there was insufficient evidence to support allegations that rape had been ‘widespread and systematic’.” But, it acknowledges sexual violence and human rights violations by Hamas. That puts it absolutely well and clear above the quality of a lot of Israeli media from the mirror-image side, and actually more anti-Hamas than even a lot of the Western press on the same story, which for some reason made the whole focus of the story into the New York Times reporting “false stories,” without also making it clear that yes, there was definitely sexual violence, that part is undeniably true even if some specific stories were false.

          Do you know of any really severely slanted / dishonest coverage by Al Jazeera? Stories where Israel are involved, and not bothering to report anything about Jared Kushner, are the only examples I’m really aware of. Other than that kind of thing I think of it as generally excellent quality.

          • That isn’t what the ship of Theseus is, and I would also point out that staking money from the funder and shelterers of a terrorist organization, even if just 30%, creates a conflict of interest that can’t be ignored or brushed aside.

            We are living in mirror world when leftists are getting their news from right wing theocracies.

                • Algeria, Bahrain, Egypt, India, Iraq: The controversy is that some government attacked Al Jazeera for its reporting and/or took away their press credentials or ability to operate. It’s noted that it’s banned from operating in Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Egypt, Jordan and the UAE.

                  Australia, Bangladesh: Can’t completely make head or tail of what happened but it sounds like government people getting mad at Al Jazeera for their reporting, not some disinterested party saying that some reporting Al Jazeera was doing wasn’t true

                  Israel: I found, for the first time, some pretty credible allegations of them doing something wrong, including among other things one story from February 2015 that actually seemed like something they reported wasn’t true.


                  At that point I stopped reading the list. But I had to go 8 countries down before I found something where it actually sounded to me like they definitely did something wrong, and 9 years back before I found one story they reported that was actually completely untrue (as opposed to just a bias you have to keep in mind when reading).

                  Question. If an Israeli or American paper:

                  • Celebrated the release of someone who had killed a bunch of Arabs
                  • Published a story about Arab atrocities that turned out not to be true
                  • Published only one side of the story about an armed conflict, where really both sides needed to be presented

                  Would that mean it’s a joke and anyone who reads it is ignorant? 'Cause they do that shit all the time. I don’t think so; I think they can still be a good paper, you just have to keep in mind the bias that they have.

            • Let me just tell you, you’d have been on the wrong side of history during the Troubles.

              Now that aside, if you think there’s only one terrorist organization involved in the current war you need to rethink, well, everything about the conflict, because everything Hamas does Israel does times 10 to 100.

          • I don’t agree with “while isolated rapes may have taken place, there was insufficient evidence to support allegations that rape had been ‘widespread and systematic’.”

            I mean it turned that that there was no widespread and systematic rape no?