The New York Times, Los Angeles Times, and Washington Post skewed coverage toward Israeli narratives, according to a quantitative analysis.
Gaywallet (they/it)
shield
creator
mod
link
fedilink
18
edit-2
10M

Cross-posting this from /c/socialism because I think it’s a quality analysis.

This is also a reminder that you’re on Beehaw and our one rule is to bee nice. We’ve seen a lot of comment threads on this conflict turn into cursing matches, lets not do that again please 💜

I like NYT… and this isn’t surprising or acceptable.

Circling the wagons can be great for defense, and when that’s defense of genocide it’s deeply shameful.

Pigeon
link
fedilink
1610M

This is a really good article, and I like that they made their data public and put a link to it right in the article.

Also, I knew it was bad, but looking at these numbers it’s even worse than I thought. I recommend reading this one.

Like, this part:

Asymmetry in how children are covered is qualitative as well as quantitative. On October 13, the Los Angeles Times ran an Associated Press report Opens in a new tabthat said, “The Gaza Health Ministry said Friday that 1,799 people have been killed in the territory, including more than 580 under the age of 18 and 351 women. Hamas’s assault last Saturday killed more than 1,300 people in Israel, including women, children and young music festivalgoers.” Notice that young Israelis are referred to as children while young Palestinians are described as people under 18.

During discussions around the prisoner exchanges, this frequent refusal to refer to Palestinians as children was even more stark, with the New York Times referring in one case to “Israeli women and children” being exchanged for “Palestinian women and minors.” (Palestinian children are referred to as “children” later in the report, when summarizing a human rights groups’ findings.)

A Washington Post report from November 21 announcing the truce deal erased Palestinian women and children altogether: “President Biden said in a statement Tuesday night that a deal to release 50 women and children held hostage by Hamas in Gaza, in exchange for 150 Palestinian prisoners detained by Israel.” The brief did not mention Palestinian women and children at all.

That is so fucked up. And there are a bunch of other examples like it re. the disparity in the language these newspapers use.

Tangentially, and though this is a whole can of worms and rather beside the point we should be focusing on at the moment: I am also disturbed that it’s apparently still common practice to bundle women together with children like this - if they just mean “noncombatants” or “caregivers” then they should say that, just saying “women and children” like this demeans female combatants and male caregivers alike. I can sort of understand an argument for it in certain contexts where women are subjugated and denied a lot of rights, but this language is used regardless of social contexts.

@t3rmit3@beehaw.org
link
fedilink
8
edit-2
10M

Yes, the US news media has a fairly long complete-since-the-founding-of-the-US history of dehumanizing people of color in their language. No surprise it’s kicked into overdrive with this “conflict” in particular.

Create a post

Breaking news from around the world.

News that is American but has an international facet may also be posted here.


Guidelines for submissions:
  • Where possible, post the original source of information.
    • If there is a paywall, you can use alternative sources or provide an archive.today, 12ft.io, etc. link in the body.
  • Do not editorialize titles. Preserve the original title when possible; edits for clarity are fine.
  • Do not post ragebait or shock stories. These will be removed.
  • Do not post tabloid or blogspam stories. These will be removed.
  • Social media should be a source of last resort.

These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.


For US News, see the US News community.


This community’s icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

  • 1 user online
  • 26 users / day
  • 64 users / week
  • 168 users / month
  • 663 users / 6 months
  • 1 subscriber
  • 2.74K Posts
  • 15K Comments
  • Modlog