Palestinian Bilal Saleh was shot in the chest by an Israeli settler as he was harvesting his olive trees in al-Sawiya, occupied West Bank.
I disagree that it’s not a good source. Obviously, it has an Arab perspective but Al Jazeera English is one of the few TV news sources with journalists on the ground in Gaza (and Lebanon). I’ve found it to be more reliable than U.S. cable news, which has cut back on international reporting and so has been fairly worthless this whole conflict. To me, the quality of reporting on AJ English — not the pundits but the straight news segments — is as high as any other channel.
Obviously, some media literacy and critical thinking is required and you should be aware that it’s a government-backed channel. When it switches to talk shows and more opinionated stuff, it’s very biased (as you’d expect). But they aren’t like RT or Fox News where even the ostensibly straight news bits are pure, uncut party propaganda.
Also, no news source is free of bias. The NY Times is reliable and professional about reporting facts but it’s also going to cover topics of interest to upper class New Yorkers even when it’s silly. They cover student groups at fancy private colleges like they’re prominent NGOs staffed with experts and not a bunch of idiot kids who were born in like 2004 and haven’t been alive long enough to know shit from shinola. No matter where you get your news, you should always be aware of the incentives, target audience, and funding sources.
I disagree that it’s not a good source.
It doesn’t matter. What matters is that the concern troll succeeded in derailing the conversation in this thread to be mostly about the merits of Al Jazeera and not about the actual topic of the article.
For comparison, the Times of Israel, citing quite a bit of Haaretz (which is generally paywalled I’m not even going to try). By now the off-duty soldier has been arrested which is the actual news in this instance, presumably due to international eyes on the whole wider situation. Israel is generally speaking shit at extending the rule of law to Palestinians, and should Palestinian authorities try to touch an Israeli they get roflstomped.
There’s left-wing Israeli orgs regularly organising trips into the West Bank to help Palestinians with the harvest specifically to avoid that kind of settler violence as should settlers kill an actual Israeli, even a left-wing one, they won’t get away wich cheap excuses, so they don’t even attempt to.
Overall, right now, we seem to have a curious combination of fascists being emboldened while simultaneously Israel is trying its darnedest to not be seen as an Apartheid regime.
Removed by mod
Strongly disagree
Removed by mod
How can Hamas do this.
No no you don’t get it. Bilal was also Hamas. Hell, even the fourth letter is the same. The olive is a double-use substance that he was gonna used to make rockets with less fat.
It’s almost funny how some people, who didn’t follow the conflict before Oct 7th, are so shocked by this. Like this isn’t a regular occurrence in the West Bank…
Unfortunately most Americans aren’t interested in international news at all.
Businesses as usual, Israeli settlers living on stolen lands rottenly rob, harass, attack, and murder Palestinians and the Israeli settlers who was arrested by the police, will be let go without a charge, as was the case of every single incident before. Israeli settlers are armed to the teeth, and are protected to commit crime.
I’ve been generally supportive of Israel’s response to the attacks and do believe that the removal of Hamas is absolutely justified, however, that doesn’t change the fact that West Bank settlers are an absolute blight on the country and do nothing but stand in the way of peace. My sympathies for them are extremely limited, and if this does turn out to be an unprovoked attack, this guy is no different than the terrorists from three weeks ago and deserves the same treatment.
This is literally what the UN secretary general was referring to when he said the Hamas attacks didn’t happen in a vacuum. I don’t think the attacks were justified or even effective but it wasn’t some random act, the growth of Hamas comes from Israeli government backed oppression of Palestinians which itself comes after failed peace talks so on and so forth until the birth of civilization (though you could argue until the late 1940s).
People living comfortably here in Germany are flocking to extremist parties, because having to wear a mask during a pandemic or minding the rights of other people makes them feel oppressed.
The rise of Hamas was absolutely inevitable given the way people in Gaza were treated. If you’re literally fighting for survival and you realize more moderate groups are unable to change anything, you will support extremists out of sheer desparation.
Exactly, and I also thought the Israeli government’s response to that statement was ridiculous. I’m by no means a blind supporter of a single side here, and no one with a functioning brain should be. There’s a lot of bad on all sides here.
Al Jazeera is an awful source. They’re owned by Qatar politicians, the same who send money and house Hamas leaders. The same that met with media mongrels during Fifa.
Anything that comes out from Qatar should be taken with a grain of salt.
I mean true enough but are you really surprised Israeli settlers are shooting innocent Palestinians? This has been the case for more than 40 years.
I mean, it almost certainly happened.
But if I posted an article from Russia Today about how smoking’s bad for you, that wouldn’t make Russia Today a reliable source.
Good propaganda mixes truths with lies.
nah, im not surprised. just think should be using better sources
Al Jazeera are a rather quality news source, up there with some of the best for sure.
And they’re no more biased towards their owner’s interests than any other source.
deleted by creator
Al Jazeera are a rather quality news source, up there with some of the best for sure.
You didn’t read the their mediabiascheck profile then. They’re decently reputable when it’s something that’s unrelated to Qatar, but once as something is Qatar, all their quality goes out the window.
That’s far from what you said in your first comment. Also, just because the source has a bias doesn’t mean that everything it says is a lie. In particular, this article includes video of Palestinian farmers being chased out of their fields by settlers.
So use an unbiased source that’s reporting on it and encourage neutrality with media consumption.
an unbiased source
I don’t think that the extraterrestrials are sharing news with humans.
And if they WERE reporting on us, every other article would start with a paragraph explaining how stupid we are as a species in spite of having so many excellent individuals amongst us 🤷
Apes together dumb.
every single news source on the planet is biased. You either want everyone to only read news sources that you approve of or you don’t know what you’re talking about.
Both Russia Today and Reuters are biased. Only someone who’s being disingenious or an idiot, would claim that means they’re equally biased or that it’s somehow close.
Same thing for Al-Jazeera. Posting an Al-Jazeera link and/or defending their journalistic integrity, undermines any argument you then proceed to make.
Go back to school to learn how to read things with a critical lens instead of throwing away the most credible middle eastern news source. I’ll keep reading the one of the only news sources that opposes the mainstream, pro-israeli narrative.
You didn’t even read my comment.
Literally said that in the second sentence of two sentences.
hey now you edited your comment, don’t play that game
I’m pretty sure I didn’t?
You didn’t. Your post was edited, 4 hours ago. Their response was 2 hours ago, so they should have seen that edit before they posted. They might be on mobile and only see the “edited” indicator, not the “how long ago” note?
wouldn’t surprise me if it was instance buggery
Al Jazeera are a rather quality news source, up there with some of the best for sure.
No.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al_Jazeera_controversies_and_criticism
I guess if it has a wiki page dedicated to controversies it must be an invalid source
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_The_New_York_Times_controversies
No, you also actually need to read the article.
deleted by creator
Removed by mod
whoa that’s a lot!
The network’s anchors and reporters have hewn closely to Hamas’s preferred vocabulary for the conflict, speaking about “resistance fighters” battling against an “occupation army.” One of Al Jazeera’s most prominent journalists, Majed Abdulhadi, celebrated Hamas’s attack as it happened by reciting a kind of prose poem: after rhapsodizing at length about the astonished surprise of an Israeli soldier who was captured in his tank, Abdulhadi concluded that, “in one fell swoop,” the assault had “wiped away dark layers of despair.”
https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/the-hamas-propaganda-war
Read that and then read some of the comments here.
Edit: man, people really don’t like hearing the truth hu?
