I don’t see the issue here. AP doesn’t obscure Israel’s involvement. They simply state the facts, which are that Israel announced an attack, and then an attack followed.
Propaganda would be omitting or inventing information.
The hypocrisy is the issue here. If they always reported like this, that would be fine
But this sort of “WE CAN’T POSSIBLY DRAW A CONCLUSION THAT WOULD BE BIASED” attitude is only ever applied to Israeli war crimes. Whereas if so much as a rumor drops that “bad country did a bad thing”, it’s frequently reported as a given fact.
I don’t see the issue here. AP doesn’t obscure Israel’s involvement. They simply state the facts, which are that Israel announced an attack, and then an attack followed.
Propaganda would be omitting or inventing information.
The hypocrisy is the issue here. If they always reported like this, that would be fine
But this sort of “WE CAN’T POSSIBLY DRAW A CONCLUSION THAT WOULD BE BIASED” attitude is only ever applied to Israeli war crimes. Whereas if so much as a rumor drops that “bad country did a bad thing”, it’s frequently reported as a given fact.
Imagine if Russia warned that they may attack a location in Kyiv, then an explosion happens.
How do you think the AP would report that?
They are very much obscuring Israel’s involvement by putting them as a sidenote at the very end and using the word “warn” instead of “threaten”.