Topic: Palestinian Terror Wave Prompts Media Bias Wave

[Mooning Freddy]

I don't know whether any of you have been watching the news recently, but the recent couple of weeks have been a very bad time in my country, Israel. In what some call a third intifada, dozens of Palestinian Arab residents of East Jerusalem and the West Bank have taken to the streets, initiating a series of murderous stabbing, running over and shooting attacks against Israeli civilians.

One can't say for sure what caused this bloody wave of Palestinian violence. It has no clear leadership. The blame probably falls with extreme incitement by Muslim religious leaders and what they call "a violation of the status-quo in the Al-Aqsa mosque / Temple mount", maybe together with inspiration from ISIL and similar terrorist organizations.
What makes this worse is that several of the terrorists who carried out attacks have been teenagers, one of them only 13 years old.

What can definitely be said is that the violence is inexcusable. It not only creates fear and severely damages the trust between Jews and Arabs in my state, but only strengthens the hatred and racism among the Jewish population, and raises calls for retaliatory attacks against Arabs among extremist Jews. First and foremost, the violence harms peaceful Arab population.

All of this is accompanied by reporting in Western media that can only be described as SLANDEROUS LIES and distortions of facts. The anti-Israel bias on international media is well-known, but it seems like this time they've lost any care for facts in their reporting.
As I attach examples of this, I ask you to be very careful in your interpretation of what you hear in the news; such anti-Israel propaganda is shameless, and many would say, reeks of anti-semitism.

Two of the aforementioned teens in the headline were killed while carrying out stabbing attacks, which were examples of Palestinian and not “Israeli violence.” The other two were killed in violent demonstrations initiated by Palestinians.

http://honestreporting.com/palestinian-terror-wave-prompts-media-bias-wave/

[zangetsu468]

It really sucks that the facts are being distorted to suit some kind of media pseudo agenda. Not that it's anything new but peaceful civilians shouldn't be made to suffer at the hands of the media or corporate world pushing false facts as if they were the truth. It really sucks and I'm sorry your country is going through that at the moment.

[Ratty]

Yeah, this sucks. If there's one thing I've learned over the last year it's that the mainstream media is incredibly biased- to the point of censorship and beyond- in service of their own political agendas. And also that so many people are scarily contented to accept the bias they are fed at face value.

[JR]

Yeah, this sucks. If there's one thing I've learned over the last year it's that the mainstream media is incredibly biased- to the point of censorship and beyond- in service of their own political agendas. And also that so many people are scarily contented to accept the bias they are fed at face value.

Same here...I've only had my eyes opened to this fact several months ago. Anything that doesn't already fit their narrative is portrayed in such a way that it does so. I've always considered myself politically liberal, but now I'm not so sure anymore.

And sadder still, half the time I can't tell if it's due to actual corruption, or just plain lazy reporting.

[Mooning Freddy]

And sadder still, half the time I can't tell if it's due to actual corruption, or just plain lazy reporting.

This is the question I ask myself all the time. And I think my answer is that they're either corrupt or extremely cowardly to the point of abandoning moral values.

I'm used to media bias in reporting about stuff happening in my country. But there was one thing that totally broke my last straw about trusting reporting in media. That was when BBC refused to refer to the Charlie Hebdo attackers as terrorists. I assume you all know the story: several Islamic extremists broke to the offices of the satiric magazine "Charlie Hebdo" and massacred several people in response to the paper posting caricatures that ridiculed the prophet Muhammad.

This is what BBC said about the incident:

The Islamists who committed the Charlie Hebdo massacre in Paris should be not be described as “terrorists” by the BBC, a senior executive at the corporation has said.

Tarik Kafala, the head of BBC Arabic, the largest of the BBC’s non-English language news services, said the term “terrorist” was too “loaded” to describe the actions of the men who killed 12 people in the attack on the French satirical magazine.

Mr Kafala, whose BBC Arabic television, radio and online news services reach a weekly audience of 36 million people, told The Independent: “We try to avoid describing anyone as a terrorist or an act as being terrorist. What we try to do is to say that ‘two men killed 12 people in an attack on the office of a satirical magazine’. That’s enough, we know what that means and what it is.”

Oh, so those two men just killed 12 people for no reason. They haven't done this to spread fear and deter people from criticizing the prophet or Islam. They haven't done this to terrorize people, which is the very definition of terrorism. 
The problem is, that they claim they assume a position of neutrality. But that's complete crap. Media is SUPPOSED to be the guardian of democracy. They can't and shouldn't assume neutrality in such a case, when democratic values are under attack. When moral values are at stake, you MUST take a stance. If you don't do that, you're a coward or assisting evil. Which is unfortunately what they're doing.

[zangetsu468]

It's corruption. The media knows exactly what it's reporting.
It's the want to spread hatred, prejudice and disdain through humanity.
It's disgusting. Although there are a few news channels and journalists who report important news without using these methods.

The problem, corporation controls big media. They have agenda, they report things to get ratings by getting views. For whatever reason the general populous is more attracted to bad news than good news, hence the ratings.

[KaZudra]

Media bias is disgusting.
Whatever our fellow people doing good is always irrelevant. It's all about our "enemies" killing people, catastrophes, and whatever Celebrities are doing.
It's quite creepy to know that most Celebs have this God-complex and packed with so much symbolism it makes Neon Genesis Evangelion's intro look subtle.
I'm not saying that the conspiracy theories are true, but there is something undeniably dark going on.

[zangetsu468]

Media bias is disgusting.
Whatever our fellow people doing good is always irrelevant. It's all about our "enemies" killing people, catastrophes, and whatever Celebrities are doing.
It's quite creepy to know that most Celebs have this God-complex and packed with so much symbolism it makes Neon Genesis Evangelion's intro look subtle.
I'm not saying that the conspiracy theories are true, but there is something undeniably dark going on.

Bingo..

Evangelion's universe especially the existence of "Seele" is close to how this world operates imho.

We need to start distinguishing the difference between conspiracy theory and conspiracy fact. Sometimes the truth really is stranger than fiction.

[Shiroi Koumori]

We need to start distinguishing the difference between conspiracy theory and conspiracy fact. Sometimes the truth really is stranger than fiction.

Sigh... but even experts on these are sometimes stumped. There are so many things going on and it's hard to track them all.

[zangetsu468]

Sigh... but even experts on these are sometimes stumped. There are so many things going on and it's hard to track them all.

It's no different to the corporate workforce... Just bombard the workers and convince them they're never doing enough so they have trouble even keeping up with the day-to-day happenings.

[Mooning Freddy]

It's all good. Just beware of becoming moral relativists. I think this is a problem in the Western world.
When I was in San Francisco there were a bunch of kids handing out some anti new-world order bullshit. It was mostly pointlessly bashing the EU, some anti-corporate stuff mixed together with conspiracy theories. And what is the solution, I wondered.
They basically argued for ditching the EU and instead strengthening the ties with Russia and China.
Oh, yeah, that's gonna make things better. Stop cooperating with liberal democracies and instead work with two of the most corrupt and authoritarian oligarchies in the world.

And this is a problem. Every time USA has some Watergate-style scandal, people go out talking about how the USA is no better than Russia or China. Have you actually tried to inquire about how things work in those countries? About the extent of corruption, censorship, and level of systematic injustice there? If you had, there would be no place for making comparisons.

[zangetsu468]

If that was directed specifically at me, I wouldn't know because I don't live in America. I'm simply commenting on how the media in the Western world generally reports news which is akin to VHS; 1-sided.

I'm not personally being a new-ageist. However, in general corporations are about big money and residual income. Therefore the more a corporation has, the more they need to deprive or eliminate the competition.

I'm not saying every corporation is necessarily evil or corrupt, I work for a corporation and it's fine, they treat their workers well (this is one from the eastern world also) but there are ones out there that step on whoever they need to in order to feed the beast. Even if this means, stepping on the little guy, telling lies or stretching the truth and making sure their asses are covered in case something political erupts unexpectedly. A general rule of thumb is that the more information there us to begin with, the more potential confusion there is, the more it becomes 'he said-she said' and people quickly forget about the truth because egos flare and cloud the minds of those involved and those observing - whether in real time or while watching the news, reading papers etc.

[X]

The problem, corporation controls big media. They have agenda, they report things to get ratings by getting views. For whatever reason the general populous is more attracted to bad news than good news, hence the ratings.

This is true sadly. but it goes beyond this I'm afraid. While most media outlets are run by corporations, news groups like FOX and CNN are not controlled by corporations. They are, in fact, controlled by the government. And it's the government that is telling them what to report and how.

[zangetsu468]

This is true sadly. but it goes beyond this I'm afraid. While most media outlets are run by corporations, news groups like FOX and CNN are not controlled by corporations. They are, in fact, controlled by the government. And it's the government that is telling them what to report and how.

You've hit the nail on the head X.
In some countries the largest corporation IS their government. Acts of crime to such an extent/ scale, causing civil unrest and recording, editing (sometimes twisting) and airing news about those acts, their ramifications and their short/ long term effects on the masses often becomes the government's political agenda.

The government has the power to frighten or empower it's people, to protect or leave them out to dry.

[Shiroi Koumori]

You've hit the nail on the head X.
In some countries the largest corporation IS their government. Acts of crime to such an extent/ scale, causing civil unrest and recording, editing (sometimes twisting) and airing news about those acts, their ramifications and their short/ long term effects on the masses often becomes the government's political agenda.

The government has the power to frighten or empower it's people, to protect or leave them out to dry.

Amen. If the news has nothing to do with the national agenda, it will never get reported, ever.
Except if you know where to look (usually online) and hope that extrajudicial killings do not reach the writer of the article.