• @LarmyOfLone@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    511 months ago

    You could be right but the way the media here works is that they do report the facts but bias them. The headline sets the tone, and how the article is written makes it more likely to come to one conclusion. So it would take much more work to make my point. But I’m pretty sure: Even if they do technically report the facts there is a huge bias to manipulate the population in the “free” press.

    In this case something like “ooohh too bad the court didn’t give the arabs what they wanted poor guys!” while it really was a legal victory - the court specifically ordered them to stop killing of palestinians.

    I can’t read newspapers without getting super angry lol

    • 【J】【u】【s】【t】【Z】
      link
      fedilink
      English
      -3
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      The court did not specifically order that. Luckily we have the order and you may read it for yourself. You don’t have to rely on the incorrect analysis of the person who said otherwise or this article, which paraphrased the order to make it sound as though it contained something which it did not contain. OP-above used an ellipses to omit a pretty crucial sentence of the order. It does not bar the killing of any Palestinians as the Guardian article and OP have implied with selective paraphrasing and omissions.

      • @WanderingVentra@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        4
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        JustZ is right in this case, and I always disagree with them lol. They want Israel to stop doing genocidal actions, so inciting genocide, blocking humanitarian aid, the most genocide-like of the collective punishment stuff. But they didn’t go as far as to call for a ceasefire or anything like that. They went farther than the Zionists who were calling it a victory, but that doesn’t mean they went as far as some people on the left think they did.