6 ms·

On what basis in Al Jazeera a fake news outlet?

by subliminalpanda 2y ago

quonn 2y ago
[flagged]
- datenyan 2y ago
  That's not a solid basis for considering something to be "fake", let alone to be banned. I could say that I have read and compared the BBC to Truth Social, and decided that BBC is "fake news"; that doesn't mean it's actually true.
  - quonn 2y ago
    I didn‘t ban it and the Israeli government certainly didn‘t ask me for my opinion. They had their own reasons and their own evidence and I only gave you _my_ reason for considering it fake news, which most of it is.
  - quonn 2y ago
    > I could say that I have read and compared the BBC to Truth Social, and decided that BBC is "fake news"; that doesn't mean it's actually true. If you decide that 2+2=5 that indeed doesn‘t make it true. I have merely said that I found that 2+2=4.
    - Cheer2171 2y ago
      [flagged]
      - quonn 2y ago
        Nowhere have I mentioned the conflict nor have I mentioned whether reporting on it is easy. Not blatantly lying is pretty easy though and Al Jazeera fails that test. More importantly, Al Jazeera is not merely reporting on the conflict, they have been „reporting“ about many other things for a long time. That’s enough data for me that can be compared to the sum of ALL other outlets. None of that is surprising either - Al Jazeera is a government propaganda tool, run by a dictatorial kingdom that ranks rather low on freedom of the press. The fact that you drew a comparison to BBC is telling.
        datenyan 2y ago
        > The fact that you drew a comparison to BBC is telling. That indeed was a specific choice - you could also state that it's a state-run "propaganda tool". It's also going to have a western (specifically UK) based view on the media it's reporting on. The same is true of Al Jazeera, or the Australian Broadcasting Company. That, in and of itself, does not mean it is "blatantly lying". No news agency is without bias, and believing so is naive. Does Al Jazeera have areas for improvement that are likely to not materialise due to the context in which the company is based? Sure, but that's also true of Fox News, CNN, the BBC, ABC, or random Reddit commenters.
- thunky 2y ago
  > On the basis that I have read and compared it myself for about two decades. And you can't give one example?
Rebelgecko 2y ago
As someone who was only familiar with Al Jazeera's English reporting (and thought it was pretty good), it was eye opening to check out their Arabic website translated into a language I speak. Maybe Google Translate was erasing some nuance, but I saw a huge number of controversial, disputed, or downright false claims that were reported uncritically as facts.
- crazygringo 2y ago
  Can you provide specifics? I'm looking at the Google Translate version of their Arabic site right now: https://www-aljazeera-net.translate.goog/?_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en&_x_tr_pto=wapp https://www-aljazeera-net.translate.goog/?_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_t... It's all looking like pretty standard news stuff to me. And I don't know about you, but I see "controversial, disputed, or downright false claims that were reported uncritically as facts" all the time even in mainstream US publications. So I'd need to see some evidence here that Al Jazeera is particularly worse.
  - alchemist1e9 2y ago
    It’s not worse at all. Actually probably the opposite, I learn some crazy stuff watching Al Jazeera and sometimes don’t believe it and go off researching it … and wow it’s very concerning. It seems almost certain to me there has to be some conspiracy amongst US publications to conceal certain information around Israeli-Palestinian conflict and history. As one example, read up on Ben Gvir, current National Security Minister … it’s totally crazy.
    - naoric 2y ago
      Unfortunately, whenever anything is being posted on this topic, we get to see so many comments such as this. > It seems almost certain to me there has to be some conspiracy amongst US publications to conceal certain information around Israeli-Palestinian conflict and history No evidence was provided, just another unfounded conspiracy theory. What can we take away from this?
invalidname 2y ago
At the risk of being downvoted as the parent comment. There were many reports in Israeli media showing their reporters framing a false narrative around the conflict. To be fair, I think that blocking etc. is a dumb move by the government. Even though they are clearly a very biased organization the damage of closing their offices is probably worse than the alternative. The fear mongering of the top parent comment is unjustified and not exactly accurate. I'm physically in Tel Aviv and can access the Al Jazeera website just fine. News outlets can't be closed and there's no "great firewall" in Israel. There is a censor but its usage is relatively limited in the age of the internet. Examples of Al Jazeera bias include a famous video of a Gazan interviewed by a reporter blaming Hamas for everything and the reporter immediately cutting it off so it won't break the narrative that everyone in Gaza blames only Israel. They're the ones that promoted the fake hospital bombing and they are the source of most fake unsubstantiated stories. Their Arabic language channel is far worse than their English coverage. They made up fake stories about IDF soldiers raping in Gaza and obviously didn't report about the actual rapes by Hamas. They refuse to interview people who can actually answer questions legitimately in Arabic such as Yosef Hadad since that would let their audience receive unfiltered truth.
- Amir_A 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - cooloo 2y ago
    [flagged]
    - klyrs 2y ago
      Not every news source need report on every story. Especially in times of war, it's important to read every side's coverage of both themselves and the other side.
    - runarberg 2y ago
      > Did Al Jazeera report on it? Yes, yes they did: https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/3/4/reasonable-grounds-to-believe-hamas-committed-sexual-violence-un https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/3/4/reasonable-grounds-t...

On what basis in Al Jazeera a fake news outlet?

quonn 2y ago

[flagged]

datenyan 2y ago
That's not a solid basis for considering something to be "fake", let alone to be banned. I could say that I have read and compared the BBC to Truth Social, and decided that BBC is "fake news"; that doesn't mean it's actually true.
- quonn 2y ago
  I didn‘t ban it and the Israeli government certainly didn‘t ask me for my opinion. They had their own reasons and their own evidence and I only gave you _my_ reason for considering it fake news, which most of it is.
- quonn 2y ago
  > I could say that I have read and compared the BBC to Truth Social, and decided that BBC is "fake news"; that doesn't mean it's actually true. If you decide that 2+2=5 that indeed doesn‘t make it true. I have merely said that I found that 2+2=4.
  - Cheer2171 2y ago
    [flagged]
    - quonn 2y ago
      Nowhere have I mentioned the conflict nor have I mentioned whether reporting on it is easy. Not blatantly lying is pretty easy though and Al Jazeera fails that test. More importantly, Al Jazeera is not merely reporting on the conflict, they have been „reporting“ about many other things for a long time. That’s enough data for me that can be compared to the sum of ALL other outlets. None of that is surprising either - Al Jazeera is a government propaganda tool, run by a dictatorial kingdom that ranks rather low on freedom of the press. The fact that you drew a comparison to BBC is telling.
      - datenyan 2y ago
        > The fact that you drew a comparison to BBC is telling. That indeed was a specific choice - you could also state that it's a state-run "propaganda tool". It's also going to have a western (specifically UK) based view on the media it's reporting on. The same is true of Al Jazeera, or the Australian Broadcasting Company. That, in and of itself, does not mean it is "blatantly lying". No news agency is without bias, and believing so is naive. Does Al Jazeera have areas for improvement that are likely to not materialise due to the context in which the company is based? Sure, but that's also true of Fox News, CNN, the BBC, ABC, or random Reddit commenters.
thunky 2y ago
> On the basis that I have read and compared it myself for about two decades. And you can't give one example?

Rebelgecko 2y ago

As someone who was only familiar with Al Jazeera's English reporting (and thought it was pretty good), it was eye opening to check out their Arabic website translated into a language I speak. Maybe Google Translate was erasing some nuance, but I saw a huge number of controversial, disputed, or downright false claims that were reported uncritically as facts.

crazygringo 2y ago
Can you provide specifics? I'm looking at the Google Translate version of their Arabic site right now: https://www-aljazeera-net.translate.goog/?_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en&_x_tr_pto=wapp https://www-aljazeera-net.translate.goog/?_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_t... It's all looking like pretty standard news stuff to me. And I don't know about you, but I see "controversial, disputed, or downright false claims that were reported uncritically as facts" all the time even in mainstream US publications. So I'd need to see some evidence here that Al Jazeera is particularly worse.
- alchemist1e9 2y ago
  It’s not worse at all. Actually probably the opposite, I learn some crazy stuff watching Al Jazeera and sometimes don’t believe it and go off researching it … and wow it’s very concerning. It seems almost certain to me there has to be some conspiracy amongst US publications to conceal certain information around Israeli-Palestinian conflict and history. As one example, read up on Ben Gvir, current National Security Minister … it’s totally crazy.
  - naoric 2y ago
    Unfortunately, whenever anything is being posted on this topic, we get to see so many comments such as this. > It seems almost certain to me there has to be some conspiracy amongst US publications to conceal certain information around Israeli-Palestinian conflict and history No evidence was provided, just another unfounded conspiracy theory. What can we take away from this?

invalidname 2y ago

At the risk of being downvoted as the parent comment. There were many reports in Israeli media showing their reporters framing a false narrative around the conflict. To be fair, I think that blocking etc. is a dumb move by the government. Even though they are clearly a very biased organization the damage of closing their offices is probably worse than the alternative. The fear mongering of the top parent comment is unjustified and not exactly accurate. I'm physically in Tel Aviv and can access the Al Jazeera website just fine. News outlets can't be closed and there's no "great firewall" in Israel. There is a censor but its usage is relatively limited in the age of the internet. Examples of Al Jazeera bias include a famous video of a Gazan interviewed by a reporter blaming Hamas for everything and the reporter immediately cutting it off so it won't break the narrative that everyone in Gaza blames only Israel. They're the ones that promoted the fake hospital bombing and they are the source of most fake unsubstantiated stories. Their Arabic language channel is far worse than their English coverage. They made up fake stories about IDF soldiers raping in Gaza and obviously didn't report about the actual rapes by Hamas. They refuse to interview people who can actually answer questions legitimately in Arabic such as Yosef Hadad since that would let their audience receive unfiltered truth.

Amir_A 2y ago
[flagged]
- cooloo 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - klyrs 2y ago
    Not every news source need report on every story. Especially in times of war, it's important to read every side's coverage of both themselves and the other side.
  - runarberg 2y ago
    > Did Al Jazeera report on it? Yes, yes they did: https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/3/4/reasonable-grounds-to-believe-hamas-committed-sexual-violence-un https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/3/4/reasonable-grounds-t...