- cross-posted to:
- news
The referenced article primarily critiques the phrasing and tone of the headlines. Through engineering of the headline, you can affect how the body of the article is perceived. The headlines are all quite flaccid and downplay the significance of the refusal. Not coming to an agreement right now, is an admission of intent to enter Rafa.
Headlines are very important as many people will only skim the title. Perhaps you did the same here, and were bamboozled by the headline of the original article?
The links you posted here are just more examples of what the original piece was criticising.
The headline in the linked article says something which is patently and demonstrably false. That’s my only point. Yes, it’s “just the headline” and we all should RTFA all the time, but still — it’s a factually incorrect statement. (Had it been, “…Isn’t Telling Us The Whole Story,” that would have been nice — it’s a matter of opinion still, but it’s not patently incorrect.)
From the linked article:
Israeli officials just rejected a cease-fire deal that could have brought hostages back because Israel wants to continue waging war. This should be a scandal — but American mainstream media isn’t reporting on it.
From the AP article:
Egyptian officials said that proposal called for a cease-fire of multiple stages starting with a limited hostage release and partial Israeli troop pullbacks within Gaza. The two sides would also negotiate a “permanent calm” that would lead to a full hostage release and greater Israeli withdrawal out of the territory, they said.
The linked article is very much an opinion piece. Claiming “Israel wants to continue waging war” is an opinion, and yeah, it seems pretty obviously true, but “Netanyahu wants to hold on to power, and waging war is his surest bet” is another valid (IMHO) opinion. But again, opinion, so at some level it’s a matter of taste (my point really is that ascribing motive to someone or something is getting into the opinion business, no matter how obvious things are). But to claim that the “American mainstream media isn’t reporting on it” is pretty disingenuous.
I would say it is quite well established that Israel wants to continue the conflict. I don’t think that is an opinion at this point.
Sure, the title isn’t the best, but isn’t that also the point they are trying to make?
To put it briefly, the story is being reported on, but it seems that the media who live off clicks and eyeballs are basically doing the equivalent of “anti-clickbait” and downplaying the significance of these stories.
Both Hamas and Israel have rejected a ton of different versions of a cease fire. Kinda hard to keep track of them all.
Both have also accepted terms for one version which the other one does not agree with. Resulting in headlines like “(Hamas/Israel) rejects cease fire”.