Thanks for providing a great service, I hope you get lots of new paid subscribers.
Honestly, all of these media fails were so egregious it was hard to choose the worst in each category! In underreported stories I had to choose the Nazism at 'pro-Palestinian' rallies (even if journalists can't be bothered to have the Arabic translated for them, everyone knows what a swastika is)--but almost chose nations with real famines (if only journalists could report on Sudan from the comfort of a fantastic Israeli restaurant; maybe then they'd bother).
In worst news agencies, they're all great/terrible choices but I had to choose BBC just because they seem to have a pattern--every time they get caught (say, using a Hamas source as their poor afflicted civilian witness), they seem to go out of their way to post a particularly outrageous terrorist-supporting narrative as some kind of twisted compensation.
Okay, now it's clear why I don't usually comment. Too much to say, too hard to say it. Apologies for this muddle. Still, very grateful for this endeavor.
This week I attended an interview with Yechiel Leiter, the Israeli ambassador to the USA. He met with the New York Times editorial board and discussed the front-page picture of the “starving” Gazan baby, with his well-nourished brother cropped out of the picture. He told them the accusation that the Israelis are intentionally starving children is a “blood libel”. Their response was that it was a misappropriation.
Thanks for an amazing year! Share your thoughts in the comments or messages.
Thanks for providing a great service, I hope you get lots of new paid subscribers.
Honestly, all of these media fails were so egregious it was hard to choose the worst in each category! In underreported stories I had to choose the Nazism at 'pro-Palestinian' rallies (even if journalists can't be bothered to have the Arabic translated for them, everyone knows what a swastika is)--but almost chose nations with real famines (if only journalists could report on Sudan from the comfort of a fantastic Israeli restaurant; maybe then they'd bother).
In worst news agencies, they're all great/terrible choices but I had to choose BBC just because they seem to have a pattern--every time they get caught (say, using a Hamas source as their poor afflicted civilian witness), they seem to go out of their way to post a particularly outrageous terrorist-supporting narrative as some kind of twisted compensation.
Okay, now it's clear why I don't usually comment. Too much to say, too hard to say it. Apologies for this muddle. Still, very grateful for this endeavor.
Thank you! I hear you. Absolutely.
This week I attended an interview with Yechiel Leiter, the Israeli ambassador to the USA. He met with the New York Times editorial board and discussed the front-page picture of the “starving” Gazan baby, with his well-nourished brother cropped out of the picture. He told them the accusation that the Israelis are intentionally starving children is a “blood libel”. Their response was that it was a misappropriation.
The NYT is hopeless.