|
On August 02 2014 07:14 Paljas wrote: considering that DinoMight very likely never actually visited Israel, I'd say that his claim about the statement being ridiculous is more ridiculous than any statment in the media i have seen Don't be mean. Everybody love everybody it's TL in here.
|
France266 Posts
On August 02 2014 06:31 WhiteDog wrote:Show nested quote +On August 02 2014 06:27 Koorb wrote:On August 02 2014 06:01 WhiteDog wrote:On August 02 2014 05:57 Koorb wrote:On August 02 2014 01:20 xM(Z wrote:On August 02 2014 00:52 Koorb wrote:On August 01 2014 22:50 xM(Z wrote:french media hard at work. Gaza through the distorted lens of French media: An emphatic characteristic of French mainstream coverage of this episode of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is its persistent attempt to constantly reframe or redefine the very nature of the conflict by creating the perception of balance of power between the Israeli and Palestinian forces, when such does not exist in reality. This persistence results in the production of biased information and reporting which misrepresents the situation. This superficial assumption resurfaced again when Palestinian resistance factions rejected the inadequate ceasefire proposed by Egypt. French media emphasised the "rejection" and again accused the Palestinian resistance of prolonging the conflict; Israel was framed as an icon of pacifism for accepting and no questions were asked about the nature of the ceasefire, the reason behind Israel's quick acceptance while none of its military objectives had been achieved, and its relationship with the Egyptian regime. Such a superficial approach belies a profound lack of analytical insight and belittles people's intelligence. http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2014/07/gaza-through-distorted-lens-fre-201473111454532885.html Yes, I'm sure Al Jazeera is quite the uninvolved, neutral point of view that is needed to understand the possible bias of the French medias... (even though, of course, Al Jazeera is a state-owned Qatari company, broadcasting from the last country that supports Hamas and shelters its exiled leaders such as Khaled Mashal) there is nothing wrong with criticizing Al Jazeera but, could you point out the false information in that article?, since you are french and all. you have happenings there, as related by Ali Saad (a French sociologist and media critic, focusing on the influence of mass media on society). you could even disagree with his conclusion but you'll still remain with the facts. The facts?? Don't make me laugh mate. This so-called press release is so ridiculous that it belongs to a parodic news outlet. Even the author is a fraud. Just look for Ali Saad on Google.fr. The self-professed sociologist and media critic is a nobody, who never got published anywhere and is completely unknown to anyone. And because he is a "fraud", all critics on french media are false ? Because he is a fraud, the press release linked in xM(Z's first post is a fraud, a vile propaganda effort which aims to trick the English-speaking public into believing that they are reading a fair and balanced description of the medias of a foreign country made by a neutral critic, which it is not. And then the pro-Palestinians will dare tell us that the pro-Israeli are fond of using propaganda, oh the irony... On August 02 2014 06:01 WhiteDog wrote: Ever known about acrimed ? Created by a collective of french academics behind Pierre Bourdieu, one of the greatest and most quoted french sociologist specifically to analyze and criticize french media. Yes, and also a well-known advocate of alter-globalization, solidly tied to the French anticapitalist left, which was specifically created to defend a political cause (that is, bashing the the right-wing Juppé government in 1996) while branding themselves as a neutral critic of the medias. Who's the next witness, the NPA? Did you read the article ? You see how detailed it is ? How much referrences ? I guess reading is useless when you're so sure of yourself. Btw acrimed was created long before the NPA.
Yes it was. It was created for the sole purpose of backing the 1995-1996 anti-goverment protests. Do you feel confortable with a "neutral observatory of the medias" which has had deeply-held political belief since its creation? Don't you think that an entity which makes no mystery of its left-wing, alter-globalization agenda may not be completely impartial for matters related to the Arab-Israeli conflict?
As to the articles you linked, here's my take for what it's worth:
The first one at least tries provide evidence to back up its discourse, but the conclusion the author gives is orientated. The last paragraph, just before the signature of Mr Salingue, is quite symptomatic in this regard. If a critic of the medias feels the need to go on a history lesson which put the blame of the current situation in Gaza on Israel's shoulders alone, while making no mention at all of Hamas' ill deeds...
The second article is sometimes dishonest (even if it is not to the author's liking, the fact is that the Israeli soldier who was taken by Hamas is a the hostage of a terrorist group, not a POW captured by a standing army), sometimes odd (who cares that the journalists often refer to the IDF as Tsahal? Is it really that much of a bias in favor of Israel?), sometimes plainly and blatantly political (the separation wall refered to as "a concrete-made shame", the veiled critic of the French intervention in Mali).
In conclusion, a critic of the alleged bias of mainstream medias which is quite biased itself.
|
These conflicts almost always burn down to internal politics and crises and power struggles. Its like the Falkland conflict. Things in Argentina are not going well? Lets shift the focus and invade some island that will be the most important focal point of all of Argentina now and all other problems cease to exist.
This happened in all neighboring Arab countries at some point in the last 100 years and even within the internal Palestinian Hamas, PLO and what not power struggles. And its only purpose is not to serve the people but to secure their own power. And Israel does the same thing: Oh tunnels ? Yeah we have known for years but lets shift the focus on that to show the Israel people that we fight and care for them.
The problem is mostly politicians, dictators or other leaders who want to secure or gain more power. They point out an enemy make everyone afraid of it so they support their leader in overcoming this enemy. Basically its always the wish to govern or rule from a small group that leads to this in the smaller or in the larger picture.
I mean what would be the worst outcome for Hamas or the right wing Israeli leaders? Its not the destruction of one side because they would be dead and would not care anymore. Its peace because who needs right winger nationalists if there is no enemy in sight and other things become important? Who needs the militant arm of the Hamas and the militant leaders when there is peace? No one, well so lets continue this game because its a win win for Hamas and Israeli leadership and only the people have to suffer, which is a good thing to them because it means more support.
Its a conundrum when you ask who profits most from from the Israeli Invasion ? Its probably Hamas. And who Profits most when Hamas launches rockets towards Israel? Its the Israeli right wing hawks. And so the tacit arrangement between Palestinian Leaders and Israeli leaders continues and continues and continues ...
|
On August 02 2014 07:21 Koorb wrote:Show nested quote +On August 02 2014 06:31 WhiteDog wrote:On August 02 2014 06:27 Koorb wrote:On August 02 2014 06:01 WhiteDog wrote:On August 02 2014 05:57 Koorb wrote:On August 02 2014 01:20 xM(Z wrote:On August 02 2014 00:52 Koorb wrote:On August 01 2014 22:50 xM(Z wrote:french media hard at work. Gaza through the distorted lens of French media: An emphatic characteristic of French mainstream coverage of this episode of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is its persistent attempt to constantly reframe or redefine the very nature of the conflict by creating the perception of balance of power between the Israeli and Palestinian forces, when such does not exist in reality. This persistence results in the production of biased information and reporting which misrepresents the situation. This superficial assumption resurfaced again when Palestinian resistance factions rejected the inadequate ceasefire proposed by Egypt. French media emphasised the "rejection" and again accused the Palestinian resistance of prolonging the conflict; Israel was framed as an icon of pacifism for accepting and no questions were asked about the nature of the ceasefire, the reason behind Israel's quick acceptance while none of its military objectives had been achieved, and its relationship with the Egyptian regime. Such a superficial approach belies a profound lack of analytical insight and belittles people's intelligence. http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2014/07/gaza-through-distorted-lens-fre-201473111454532885.html Yes, I'm sure Al Jazeera is quite the uninvolved, neutral point of view that is needed to understand the possible bias of the French medias... (even though, of course, Al Jazeera is a state-owned Qatari company, broadcasting from the last country that supports Hamas and shelters its exiled leaders such as Khaled Mashal) there is nothing wrong with criticizing Al Jazeera but, could you point out the false information in that article?, since you are french and all. you have happenings there, as related by Ali Saad (a French sociologist and media critic, focusing on the influence of mass media on society). you could even disagree with his conclusion but you'll still remain with the facts. The facts?? Don't make me laugh mate. This so-called press release is so ridiculous that it belongs to a parodic news outlet. Even the author is a fraud. Just look for Ali Saad on Google.fr. The self-professed sociologist and media critic is a nobody, who never got published anywhere and is completely unknown to anyone. And because he is a "fraud", all critics on french media are false ? Because he is a fraud, the press release linked in xM(Z's first post is a fraud, a vile propaganda effort which aims to trick the English-speaking public into believing that they are reading a fair and balanced description of the medias of a foreign country made by a neutral critic, which it is not. And then the pro-Palestinians will dare tell us that the pro-Israeli are fond of using propaganda, oh the irony... On August 02 2014 06:01 WhiteDog wrote: Ever known about acrimed ? Created by a collective of french academics behind Pierre Bourdieu, one of the greatest and most quoted french sociologist specifically to analyze and criticize french media. Yes, and also a well-known advocate of alter-globalization, solidly tied to the French anticapitalist left, which was specifically created to defend a political cause (that is, bashing the the right-wing Juppé government in 1996) while branding themselves as a neutral critic of the medias. Who's the next witness, the NPA? Did you read the article ? You see how detailed it is ? How much referrences ? I guess reading is useless when you're so sure of yourself. Btw acrimed was created long before the NPA. Yes it was. It was created for the sole purpose of backing the 1995-1996 anti-goverment protests. Do you feel confortable with a "neutral observatory of the medias" which has had deeply-held political belief since its creation? Don't you think that an entity which makes no mystery of its left-wing, alter-globalization agenda may not be completely impartial for matters related to the Arab-Israeli conflict? As to the articles you linked, here's my take for what it's worth: The first one at least tries provide evidence to back up its discourse, but the conclusion the author gives is orientated. The last paragraph, just before the signature of Mr Salingue, is quite symptomatic in this regard. If a critic of the medias feels the need to go on a history lesson which put the blame of the current situation in Gaza on Israel's shoulders alone, while making no mention at all of Hamas' ill deeds... The second article is sometimes dishonest (even if it is not to the author's liking, the fact is that the Israeli soldier who was taken by Hamas is a the hostage of a terrorist group, not a POW captured by a standing army), sometimes odd (who cares that the journalists often refer to the IDF as Tsahal? Is it really that much of a bias in favor of Israel?), sometimes plainly and blatantly political (the separation wall refered to as "a concrete-made shame", the veiled critic of the French intervention in Mali). In conclusion, a critic of the alleged bias of mainstream medias which is quite biased itself. I don't believe in your view on neutrality anyway. I'm a Weberian, I believe that neutrality can only happen in relation to certain values considered and publicly exposed as facts - axiological neutrality. Acrimed have specific value, their own gods, and this situation cannot be avoided in human society. But they can still be objectiv towards some specific objects because they prevent themselves from making judgements on values, expose their own value publicly and study specific materials with a methodology grounded in an epistemology.
What's amazing is that, in a country where what 80% of the people consider media biased, where everybody is unhappy about modern journalism, the state of our "independant" press, you criticize a completly benevolant group because they have far left value. Do you know that The Figaro is openly right ? That Le Monde is a centric left journal ? But more than that, they are paid by rich people and because of that cannot say everything they could.
|
|
On August 02 2014 07:14 Paljas wrote: considering that DinoMight very likely never actually visited Israel, I'd say that his claim about the statement being ridiculous is more ridiculous than any statment in the media i have seen
I don't see how me visiting Israel is relevant at all.
|
On August 02 2014 07:14 Paljas wrote: considering that DinoMight very likely never actually visited Israel, I'd say that his claim about the statement being ridiculous is more ridiculous than any statment in the media i have seen Some of us have been on a birthright trip and still aren't dumb enough to think that "you haven't been to Israel, you don't know anything!!" is in any way shape or form an argument. Because, you know, I can bet you never had to live in Gaza without an international passport. Boom! Dumb argument countered by itself!
|
Quantifying fear is a fools errand all around, particularly in relation to the scope of an online discussion.
|
Northern Ireland23782 Posts
Hopefully not. That said if enough people believe it is, it will have much the same effect. I wonder how many reposts it's had before being verified or whatever, probably a ton.
|
On August 02 2014 08:02 Jormundr wrote:Show nested quote +On August 02 2014 07:14 Paljas wrote: considering that DinoMight very likely never actually visited Israel, I'd say that his claim about the statement being ridiculous is more ridiculous than any statment in the media i have seen Some of us have been on a birthright trip and still aren't dumb enough to think that "you haven't been to Israel, you don't know anything!!" is in any way shape or form an argument. Because, you know, I can bet you never had to live in Gaza without an international passport. Boom! Dumb argument countered by itself! did you even read what post i responed too? claiming that people in Israel dont live in fear from the rocket attacks is either ignorant or just dumb. It's basically belittlement of terrorists attacks. Claiming such things without ever been in a sitaution similar is just bullshit.
your comment about Gaza is pretty nonsensical too, as i have a clear pro Palestine standpoint in this conflict.
to the article posted above: that article is pretty bad (cant tell the difference between instagramm and twitter), so this whole things seems sketchy. Also, soliders have gone to jail for posting stuff like that, so yea, I wouldnt really believe that it isnt fake.
|
Russian Federation3631 Posts
Hello my friends
Whoever bet '90 minutes' in the "when is ceasefire broken" pool, you won! Please collect your winnings:
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-28606099
Of course Hamas denies involvement in the kidnapping. Maybe aliens did it. (To my knowledge tunnel demolition was allowed during ceasefire and Hamas acceded to this.)
|
remember some people in gaza were literally drowning in shit because israel wouldnt allow new supplies to come through for fixing sewage facilities. ironically hamas fired rockets at israel with old sewage pipes.
in terms of fear, israel does have more safety net from actual danger and everyday infrastructure. however, one must also not forget this view only comes from those only observing. people in israel dont give a single fuck about this, fear is fear and having to worry about your family being hit by hamas rocket throws every statistics out the window.
|
Russian Federation3631 Posts
remember some people in gaza were literally drowning in shit because israel wouldnt allow new supplies to come through for fixing sewage facilities. ironically hamas fired rockets at israel with old sewage pipes.
truly a humanitarian tragedy. Imagine all the internal fortifications Hamas could have built with those supplies
|
On August 02 2014 08:02 Jormundr wrote: Some of us have been on a birthright trip and still aren't dumb enough to think that "you haven't been to Israel, you don't know anything!!" is in any way shape or form an argument. Because, you know, I can bet you never had to live in Gaza without an international passport. Boom! Dumb argument countered by itself!
Please explain your "birthright"
|
Practically every Jewish person is allowed a fully paid visit to Israel in the interest of what is called a "birthright". Pretty cool IMO.
|
|
When an article basically admits that it has no conclusive evidence and can only reference the author's inability to forget what he saw in person, in addition to being on the Daily Beast, I think it's safe to say that it should not itself be counted as a piece of evidence pointing towards anything other than that the Daily Beast likes its click bait.
|
To be fair, we will never be able to completly enlight what happen in Gaza, at least not in the next few months, until an independant UN investigation start to work on the subject (or a humanitarian organisation such as amnesty international), but there are already various suspicion of war crime, like there were in the last attack - that lead to the goldstone report, a report that goldstone rejected afterward. But don't discard the idea of civilian execution that fast, it happened in Israeli's history, quite a few times actually.
|
One needn't discard that possibility in order to discard the daily beast article as a credible piece of journalism.
|
Russian Federation3631 Posts
On August 02 2014 09:35 WhiteDog wrote: To be fair, we will never be able to completly enlight what happen in Gaza, at least not in the next few months, until an independant UN investigation start to work on the subject (or a humanitarian organisation such as amnesty international), but there are already various suspicion of war crime, like there were in the last attack - that lead to the goldstone report, a report that goldstone rejected afterward. But don't discard the idea of civilian execution that fast, it happened in Israeli's history, quite a few times actually. he's got a point, the UN is pretty experienced at the whole "atrocities against civilians" thing
|
|
|
|