War in Israel (1 Viewer)

[3C's]

How can all of these revised media reports still be declaring 500 people dead???

There might literally be zero.

Here's what CNN is currently reporting on this topic:

Editor's Note: This post contains graphic descriptions of violence.

Two witnesses of the deadly blast Tuesday at the Al-Ahli Baptist Hospital in Gaza described the scene after the explosion, which the Hamas-controlled Palestinian Ministry of Health has said killed hundreds of people.

One, a doctor who is working with Doctors Without Borders and said he was inside the hospital at the time, described in a post on Facebook seeing "many dismembered bodies" following the blast, including a decapitated child.

The doctor, Dr. Ghassan Abu-Sitteh, said he believed the overall death toll would "continue to increase."

Another witness, Adnan, told CNN the devastation that followed the blast was "beyond normal."

“If you look over there on the roads, there are body parts all over it, heads and hands of people, hands and brains of children," said Adnan, who would give only his first name. "It is truly indescribable.”

Adnan pointed out everyday items within the wreckage, like mattresses, pillows, children's shoes and diapers.

“Look, what kind of danger does a mattress and a pillow pose to Israel? What fault did the trees and rocks make? Come here, look," Adnan said, pointing out shoes and diapers. "It was full of supplies for people."

Some context: CNN cannot independently confirm what caused the blast nor the extent of casualties.

Gaza officials blamed Israel, while the Israel Defense Forces said it was the result of a failed rocket launch by Islamic Jihad. That group denied the Israeli assertion.

The US government currently believes that Israel "is not responsible" for the blast, according to the National Security Council.

Live updates: Israel-Hamas war rages as President Biden arrives in Tel Aviv

US President Joe Biden has arrived in Israel on an extraordinary high-stakes trip as the region is gripped by violence in the aftermath of Hamas' attacks and Israel's subsequent response. Follow here for live updates.

www.cnn.com

Is there any evidence whatsoever, other than the word of these two people that I cannot possibly assess, that backs up any of this? Where are the photos of the many dismembered bodies? Where is this decapitated child? That seems awfully on-the-nose given the events of 10/7, so surely is evidence of that. Where is this road that is allegedly covered in body parts and brains? Why isn't anyone being shown any of this? And why is CNN passing it along without corroboration?

Why do random people on Twitter -- all of whom have full time jobs doing something other than journalism -- care more about finding out what actually happened than the professional journalists?

Could certainly be propaganda but some doctors (supposedly) held a press conference among the bodies outside of the al-ahli arab hospital.

And yet no one can post a link to a pic of all those bodies and/or even a written confirmation of someone seeing this news conference amongst them?

I'm not posting a link to the press conference but it is out there. And Sky News has a video of the hospital people were taken to in the aftermath.

 

[quick-hands]

Is there any evidence whatsoever, other than the word of these two people that I cannot possibly assess

But his name is Adnan with no last name! In who, if not Adnan, can you trust?

Adnan is the American version of Nick. Nick is your pal, he's your buddy.

 

[The Commish]

My understanding is that thousands of people were in/around the hospital. Many were hurt already, but even more were in that area because they were told to leave their homes. Just ugly all around.

 

[parasaurolophus]

If Elon Musk had not bought Twitter, the NYT would probably still be running with "Israel Bombs Hospital" and we would have not way of knowing otherwise.

It's important for leading news organizations to be judicious and verify facts before publishing stories. Notable that IK left off the "Palestinians say" part of the headline that correctly attributed the accusation to the Palestinian Health Organization. In a post critical of the NYT for getting the headline wrong, IK misrepresented the headline. In my opinion the headline, even while technically accurate, misled readers. The NYT should do better.

That said, the idea that reporting will be perfect in real time during conflict is unrealistic. Fog of war explains this error, and subsequently the NYTimes has revised their headline and provided additional reporting clarifying what happened at the hospital. That's because the NYT has high editorial standards and works harder that any other news organization on the planet to get its stories correct. I.e. they are acting in good faith, and over time, deserve the benefit of the doubt.

The idea that randoms on Elon Musk's twitter are more reliable than the NYT is weird. That's the equivalent of me claiming to be better than professional Vegas odds setters because I picked the Browns to beat the 49ers last weekend. Discrediting entire institutions due to good faith errors is one of the reasons we see so much chaos currently.

The NYT used a picture of a leveled building from somewhere else. Hope this helps

 

[IvanKaramazov]

If Elon Musk had not bought Twitter, the NYT would probably still be running with "Israel Bombs Hospital" and we would have not way of knowing otherwise.

It's important for leading news organizations to be judicious and verify facts before publishing stories. Notable that IK left off the "Palestinians say" part of the headline that correctly attributed the accusation to the Palestinian Health Organization. In a post critical of the NYT for getting the headline wrong, IK misrepresented the headline. In my opinion the headline, even while technically accurate, misled readers. The NYT should do better.

That said, the idea that reporting will be perfect in real time during conflict is unrealistic. Fog of war explains this error, and subsequently the NYTimes has revised their headline and provided additional reporting clarifying what happened at the hospital. That's because the NYT has high editorial standards and works harder that any other news organization on the planet to get its stories correct. I.e. they are acting in good faith, and over time, deserve the benefit of the doubt.

The idea that randoms on Elon Musk's twitter are more reliable than the NYT is weird. That's the equivalent of me claiming to be better than professional Vegas odds setters because I picked the Browns to beat the 49ers last weekend. Discrediting entire institutions due to good faith errors is one of the reasons we see so much chaos currently.

And yet my Twitter randoms actually did out-perform the NYT, and they've done so quite a few times over the past few years. It's not just this once.

Honestly, it doesn't matter to me whether you believe me or not. All I know is that I don't have to walk back anything I posted last night, while quite a few others (not just here) do. Maybe you think I just got lucky hitting my hard 15 against the dealer 6, but I know that isn't the case. The long-run pattern of results speak for themselves.

(Edit: Also, "fog of war" is a reason to reserve judgement. It is not a legitimate excuse for the NYT running undiluted Hamas propaganda without bothering to do basic due diligence. Again, this kind of disinformation has real consequences and literally is going to get people killed. The King of Jordan cancelled his visit with President Biden over this. It's not just fun and games.)

 

[Gr00vus]

Why does Israel need armament donations from the US? Ukraine I understand. They got invaded by Russia. The IDF should buy their own, no?

Partially realpolitik: Israel is far and away the best U.S. ally/proxy in the region. They nip a lot of terrorist organizations and activities in the bud for/with us, and provide a land based launch location for potential necessary activities. The transaction is the price of armament donations is dwarfed by the resulting increase in stability/control in the area. And of course, that transaction does feed into accusations of colonialism / occupation - not completely without merit. U.S. adventures in middle eastern allies and proxies haven't worked out so well with other regimes in other states - it's worth it to keep this one propped up.

 

[Sand]

From the WSJ:

Photos and videos taken at the site of the blast show that the hospital compound’s buildings haven’t sustained major damage.

The small size of the open area where the explosion occurred, coupled with limited shock-wave damage, was inconsistent with the death toll claimed by the Palestinian Health Ministry, several open-source intelligence analysts said.

“At the moment, the preponderance of evidence does point to it being a Hamas or PIJ rocket hitting the area,” said Blake Spendley, an open-source intelligence analyst. He said videos and photos he has reviewed showing the scene were more consistent with a death toll of about 50 rather than the 500 initially claimed by Hamas.

A shallow crater in a parking lot, which appears in a video of the site on Wednesday, was cited by Israel as evidence that the blast wasn’t an airstrike.

Not surprised at all that this comes from a financial information source. I tend to find these sources (WSJ, CNBC, Economist, etc.) tend to be the most neutral and reliable.

 

[Sand]

The NYT used a picture of a leveled building from somewhere else. Hope this helps

That's infuriating - designed to play on emotions and storylines that they feel entitled to control.

 

[CletiusMaximus]

The commentary I respect are those who are pointing out that none of this matters. These people have been slaughtering each other my entire life and will be doing so long after I die. I could not care less which children were killed yesterday and who did the killing because tomorrow the same will happen again. The commentary I don’t respect are those claiming they know exactly what happened and are undeniably on the right side of history in this and anyone who acknowledges an historical moral grey area are the ignorants.

I'll say this as a last-ditch effort to keep this thread open and not get it locked.

Please, everyone, not just the quoted poster, let's not get into slights at who is respected and who is not respected.

I think lots of people do care about children being killed. And people do think some of this matters.

I agree with you that we all should take a humble approach to this, knowing there's a ton we likely don't know.

I also don't know that everything has to be "fine people on both sides". People can share opinions and insights. That's mostly what we do here. But I agree a dose of humility that we're not all-knowing is good for all of us. Especially me.

Let's please keep this back on track of discussing the actual topic and events.

Edited to be more clear.

Hey Joe, thanks. My comment about respecting or not respecting "commentary" is not intended to call out anyone here - it was in the context we were talking about - news sources and commentary on Twitter and the like. That could have been worded better. My comment about caring or not caring I think maybe was also unclear or misinterpreted. My point is that all I care about anymore is the innocents being slaughtered as we've seen this past week on both sides of the border - meaning, I no longer care about placing blame after 30+ years of trying to stay educated on this topic. I understand that aspect of these constant wars is very important to others for obvious reasons. Its distressing to me so much energy is focused on blame and retribution rather than solutions, although I am also resigned to the fact that solutions don't exist. There was a time I thought there was a great opportunity to create a shining example of human benevolence and love in Jerusalem with Christians, Jews and Muslims living and worshiping together in peace but of course the exact opposite has been proven to be the case and I think we can all now agree that creating the state of Israel in the way it was done was a terrible misjudgment.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

The NYT used a picture of a leveled building from somewhere else. Hope this helps

I literally just saw this.

Here's an explainer for those who are interested. @tommyGunZ in particular will find this interesting. NGL, I saw this NYT story myself on Twitter, on my phone, and on my desktop, and I never once thought to question whether that building was part of the hospital that was hit. I guess I sort of fell for this even if I was mad at the NYT for some other piece of misinformation.

 

[jm192]

If Elon Musk had not bought Twitter, the NYT would probably still be running with "Israel Bombs Hospital" and we would have not way of knowing otherwise.

It's important for leading news organizations to be judicious and verify facts before publishing stories. Notable that IK left off the "Palestinians say" part of the headline that correctly attributed the accusation to the Palestinian Health Organization. In a post critical of the NYT for getting the headline wrong, IK misrepresented the headline. In my opinion the headline, even while technically accurate, misled readers. The NYT should do better.

That said, the idea that reporting will be perfect in real time during conflict is unrealistic. Fog of war explains this error, and subsequently the NYTimes has revised their headline and provided additional reporting clarifying what happened at the hospital. That's because the NYT has high editorial standards and works harder that any other news organization on the planet to get its stories correct. I.e. they are acting in good faith, and over time, deserve the benefit of the doubt.

The idea that randoms on Elon Musk's twitter are more reliable than the NYT is weird. That's the equivalent of me claiming to be better than professional Vegas odds setters because I picked the Browns to beat the 49ers last weekend. Discrediting entire institutions due to good faith errors is one of the reasons we see so much chaos currently.

And yet my Twitter randoms actually did out-perform the NYT, and they've done so quite a few times over the past few years. It's not just this once.

Honestly, it doesn't matter to me whether you believe me or not. All I know is that I don't have to walk back anything I posted last night, while quite a few others (not just here) do. Maybe you think I just got lucky hitting my hard 15 against the dealer 6, but I know that isn't the case. The long-run pattern of results speak for themselves.

(Edit: Also, "fog of war" is a reason to reserve judgement. It is not a legitimate excuse for the NYT running undiluted Hamas propaganda without bothering to do basic due diligence. Again, this kind of disinformation has real consequences and literally is going to get people killed. The King of Jordan cancelled his visit with President Biden over this. It's not just fun and games.)

Agree so much with this.

Hamas relies so heavily on the propaganda machine. The NYT and other news organizations propagating their lies is problematic and disgusting.

Also I agree that Twitter randoms that are actually on the ground are keeping the world honest. We saw it at the start of the Ukraine/Russian war. We're seeing it now.

 

[Boston]

If Elon Musk had not bought Twitter, the NYT would probably still be running with "Israel Bombs Hospital" and we would have not way of knowing otherwise.

It's important for leading news organizations to be judicious and verify facts before publishing stories. Notable that IK left off the "Palestinians say" part of the headline that correctly attributed the accusation to the Palestinian Health Organization. In a post critical of the NYT for getting the headline wrong, IK misrepresented the headline. In my opinion the headline, even while technically accurate, misled readers. The NYT should do better.

That said, the idea that reporting will be perfect in real time during conflict is unrealistic. Fog of war explains this error, and subsequently the NYTimes has revised their headline and provided additional reporting clarifying what happened at the hospital. That's because the NYT has high editorial standards and works harder that any other news organization on the planet to get its stories correct. I.e. they are acting in good faith, and over time, deserve the benefit of the doubt.

The idea that randoms on Elon Musk's twitter are more reliable than the NYT is weird. That's the equivalent of me claiming to be better than professional Vegas odds setters because I picked the Browns to beat the 49ers last weekend. Discrediting entire institutions due to good faith errors is one of the reasons we see so much chaos currently.

The NYT used a picture of a leveled building from somewhere else. Hope this helps

The New York Times should change their tagline from "All the news that's fit to print" to "It's not a lie if you believe it."

 

[jm192]

The NYT used a picture of a leveled building from somewhere else. Hope this helps

I literally just saw this.

Here's an explainer for those who are interested. @tommyGunZ in particular will find this interesting. NGL, I saw this NYT story myself on Twitter, on my phone, and on my desktop, and I never once thought to question whether that building was part of the hospital that was hit. I guess I sort of fell for this even if I was mad at the NYT for some other piece of misinformation.

Unbelievable.

 

[dickey moe]

From the WSJ:

Photos and videos taken at the site of the blast show that the hospital compound’s buildings haven’t sustained major damage.

The small size of the open area where the explosion occurred, coupled with limited shock-wave damage, was inconsistent with the death toll claimed by the Palestinian Health Ministry, several open-source intelligence analysts said.

“At the moment, the preponderance of evidence does point to it being a Hamas or PIJ rocket hitting the area,” said Blake Spendley, an open-source intelligence analyst. He said videos and photos he has reviewed showing the scene were more consistent with a death toll of about 50 rather than the 500 initially claimed by Hamas.

A shallow crater in a parking lot, which appears in a video of the site on Wednesday, was cited by Israel as evidence that the blast wasn’t an airstrike.

How can all of these revised media reports still be declaring 500 people dead???

There might literally be zero.

FWIW.....The only place I've seen this number of 500 is here in the FFA

That is the prevailing number I saw quoted throughout mainstream news yesterday morning. Once I ventured outside of that realm, more accurate reporting suggested otherwise.

 

[quick-hands]

My understanding is that thousands of people were in/around the hospital. Many were hurt already, but even more were in that area because they were told to leave their homes. Just ugly all around.

on hamas

 

[tommyGunZ]

The NYT used a picture of a leveled building from somewhere else. Hope this helps

I literally just saw this.

Here's an explainer for those who are interested. @tommyGunZ in particular will find this interesting. NGL, I saw this NYT story myself on Twitter, on my phone, and on my desktop, and I never once thought to question whether that building was part of the hospital that was hit. I guess I sort of fell for this even if I was mad at the NYT for some other piece of misinformation.

Thanks for sharing. I think the NYT could have been better here. We agree in the micro - it's the macro where we diverge. Over the long run, you'll unquestionably be more accurately informed by reading the NYT, WaPost, etc. daily than following randoms on Twitter. There is far more misinformation and no editorial standards for the vast majority of armchair analysts on Twitter. None of them ever get any of the scrutiny the NYT is getting today.

I don't question your honesty IK, I'm sure there were lots of contrarians last night on twitter doubting Israel's responsibility. What I doubt is their accuracy over the long run vs. larger organizations with stricter standards and more seasoned editorial decision makers.

 

[3C's]

This certainly plays into the news orgs ability to report accurately:

The Post, like other international news organizations, has no access to the hospital site as the borders to Gaza through Israel and Egypt are closed. <and> The Post is unable to accurately verify the final death count and has to rely on local organizations.

 

[quick-hands]

can hamas be deleted without clearing gaza?

 

[Captain Cranks]

I don't question your honesty IK, I'm sure there were lots of contrarians last night on twitter doubting Israel's responsibility. What I doubt is their accuracy over the long run vs. larger organizations with stricter standards and more seasoned editorial decision makers.

This is likely true. Emphasizing the few times when it goes the other way has a strong hint of confirmation bias.

 

[3C's]

can hamas be deleted without clearing gaza?

Wouldn't seem likely. And even harder if they're going to hide out somewhere outside of Gaza.

 

[parasaurolophus]

I literally just saw this.

Here's an explainer for those who are interested. @tommyGunZ in particular will find this interesting. NGL, I saw this NYT story myself on Twitter, on my phone, and on my desktop, and I never once thought to question whether that building was part of the hospital that was hit. I guess I sort of fell for this even if I was mad at the NYT for some other piece of misinformation.

That explainer sugar coats it. This wasn't fog of war or rush to be first.

The NYT intentionally published two different incorrect photos. They knew exactly what they were photos of.

They also know darn well that Hamas is a terrorist organization that lies all the time.

This is inexcusable behavior.

 

[Alex P Keaton]

The NYT used a picture of a leveled building from somewhere else. Hope this helps

I literally just saw this.

Here's an explainer for those who are interested. @tommyGunZ in particular will find this interesting. NGL, I saw this NYT story myself on Twitter, on my phone, and on my desktop, and I never once thought to question whether that building was part of the hospital that was hit. I guess I sort of fell for this even if I was mad at the NYT for some other piece of misinformation.

Thanks for sharing. I think the NYT could have been better here. We agree in the micro - it's the macro where we diverge. Over the long run, you'll unquestionably be more accurately informed by reading the NYT, WaPost, etc. daily than following randoms on Twitter. There is far more misinformation and no editorial standards for the vast majority of armchair analysts on Twitter. None of them ever get any of the scrutiny the NYT is getting today.

I don't question your honesty IK, I'm sure there were lots of contrarians last night on twitter doubting Israel's responsibility. What I doubt is their accuracy over the long run vs. larger organizations with stricter standards and more seasoned editorial decision makers.

I’m not going to pretend to speak for IK here, but based on his comments in this thread, he isn’t “following randoms on Twitter.” He is following a specific subset of Twitter users who are drawn to facts, logic and critical analysis. People who have demonstrated what he concerns a rational approach to uncertain topics or events.

It wouldn’t surprise me in the least to see that type of subset of people “outperform” random media members, particularly when it comes to unusual events like this one.

(Side note: good to see you in here TGunz. I still credit you with saving me a ton of money during the mid/late 2000s real estate bubble)

 

[N Zone]

The corrupt, dishonest, and/or inept media could be what sparks WWIII. It needs to be reigned in and fought against at every turn by people and organizations and governments that want the truth to be told.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

The NYT used a picture of a leveled building from somewhere else. Hope this helps

I literally just saw this.

Here's an explainer for those who are interested. @tommyGunZ in particular will find this interesting. NGL, I saw this NYT story myself on Twitter, on my phone, and on my desktop, and I never once thought to question whether that building was part of the hospital that was hit. I guess I sort of fell for this even if I was mad at the NYT for some other piece of misinformation.

Thanks for sharing. I think the NYT could have been better here. We agree in the micro - it's the macro where we diverge. Over the long run, you'll unquestionably be more accurately informed by reading the NYT, WaPost, etc. daily than following randoms on Twitter. There is far more misinformation and no editorial standards for the vast majority of armchair analysts on Twitter. None of them ever get any of the scrutiny the NYT is getting today.

I don't question your honesty IK, I'm sure there were lots of contrarians last night on twitter doubting Israel's responsibility. What I doubt is their accuracy over the long run vs. larger organizations with stricter standards and more seasoned editorial decision makers.

I used to take a lot of pride in reading these publications
When i was young I used to take pride watching 60Minutes on CBS, back in the 90s I thought I was informed, and maybe I was.
When I lived in SoCal, I learned a lot more by speaking directly with folks from all over the globe.
Many a night I would play poker and there would be a man from Israel, maybe a man from Iran, we would have a Chinese and Vietnamese and pretty soon I was about the white man at the table, I miss those days/nights, they were fun hearing about what some of these places were like before dictators and such took them over.

Most of the writers and reporters I follow are not printed in those publications
Mrs and I are in non profit and we used to have a lot of online subscriptions to the publications you highlighted, we use them for work purposes and that's about it.
Thanks

 

[The Commish]

That is the prevailing number I saw quoted throughout mainstream news yesterday morning. Once I ventured outside of that realm, more accurate reporting suggested otherwise.

Right. This tends to happen when we leave the US media bubble driven merely by eyeballs and clicks. I'm not getting too excited just yet, but it seems folks here are beginning to understand that.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

About every so often I have to completely shut it off.
It disturbs me what I see in big cities with protesting and also what is unfolding at some highly respected Universities
But I want to say that cameras from media being there attracts flies

I don't say this very often but maybe these college protesters just need a hug. What are they 19-20 years old?
They came out of the pandemic, weren't allowed to participate towards their end of their HS years the same way many of us were able to enjoy growing up.
They are put thru the ringer in recent years with having to face gender identity questions and a slew of social issues,
sky high interest rates as they start to look at Real Estate for a way to get ahead as many of us did,
constant disease and potential virus outbreaks, a job market rich in entry level but short on real wages...this is just the low hanging fruit

And my point is some of these young souls are simply looking for their Lollapalooza so let's not take the entire generation and label them or act offended, we did this to them.
It's time to to take some ownership and not pretend we don't have a hand in all of these terrible uses of time/protest we see.
That's my 1st question, where do these people find the time?
I want to lighten the mood a little around here and also point out how fortunate and lucky we are to not be over there in the Middle East.

The less offended and shocked we are by the behavior and protests we see carried out, the faster we can put our heads together and give these younger generations better guidance.
Don't fall prey to the media here at home. They want us to be outraged by what I feel is a minority of people. These things are not happening on my street or neighborhood, not yet.
Sure, it looks like a movement when they have 500-1,000 maybe gathered and marching but compared to the population it's tiny.
Most of us are too busy working and living life to care that much.

And I will close the post with this thought, I'm the type of person who usually will try and aid when it's 3 on 1 and I bet many of you are conditioned similar.
Whether it's a physical fight or just a confrontation on any front, many people jump to the aid of those who seem outnumbered.
Try not to see it as people always picking a flag as much as it is people just thinking what if it were them in the same situation.
Everyone will answer that question differently and thank God we live in a country where that is allowed and we can discuss it and still hold our heads up high with dignity
I am looking forward to this weekend, movies and NFL and the freedom to do whatever I want and feel however I desire.

 

[SoBeDad]

A dentist (with an Arab name) got fired after tearing down flyers of kidnapped Israelis. This was in a chic part of downtown Miami. I see the flyers in many parts of Miami Beach. Cameras and cell phones everywhere, not a smart move. This would've had its own thread back in the day.

Dentist fired after Brickell video shows him ripping down posters of kidnapped Israelis

A dentist with a Miami practice has been fired after video captured him and another man removing posters of those kidnapped in Israel in the Hamas attacks.

www.local10.com

 

[IvanKaramazov]

To be fair, legacy media sources are generally fine for topics that don't have anything to do with domestic politics, like science (edit: well, except for public health), finance, political strife in Burkina Faso, and stuff like that. As you get closer and closer to tribal politics, the gravitational pull of tribal loyalty seriously warps the way stories are covered. And that gravity always, literally without exception, pulls its objects in a completely predictable direction. The "mistakes" made by these sources are highly correlated with one particular tribe's preferred narrative, and that's blindingly obvious if you're not part of that tribe.

I'm like MOP in the sense that I remember the days when having a NYT subscription marked a person as being well-read and well-informed. I was proud to have a student subscription when I was in college -- a bunch of us would walk over to the mail room in Center Hall (ofc) to pick up our papers each morning. They would all be laid out with our names attached with little stickers, and students and faculty would all have their copies mixed together alphabetically. Now, when somebody tells you that they get the news from that type of source, you know they're going to deeply misinformed about a very specific set of issues. Not all issues and not even most issues, just the hot-button ones.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

A dentist (with an Arab name) got fired after tearing down flyers of kidnapped Israelis. This was in a chic part of downtown Miami. I see the flyers in many parts of Miami Beach. Cameras and cell phones everywhere, not a smart move. This would've had its own thread back in the day.

Dentist fired after Brickell video shows him ripping down posters of kidnapped Israelis

A dentist with a Miami practice has been fired after video captured him and another man removing posters of those kidnapped in Israel in the Hamas attacks.

www.local10.com

This stuff is showing up in my feed as well. I would encourage folks not to get too hung up on individual people behaving badly. For example, I'm sure that right now, somewhere in the United States, somebody somewhere is saying something unpleasant to an Arab-looking person because they figure Arab = Hamas. That person and the person tearing down those posters are, in essence, the same person. They both belong to the "tool" tribe. Let us all agree that the members of the tool tribe are bad and just move on.

Organized protests, open letters, and stuff like are different and are more worthy of consideration IMO.

 

[3C's]

From the Daily Mail which of course isn't the best of sources but it's just a replay of what they're saying:

• Gaza Health Ministry said 471 Palestinians were killed in the blast Tuesday night
• But Israel today rubbished claims, saying only 'several dozen' people were killed

I'd skew heavily toward the Israeli claim here for sure considering Gaza Health Ministry is essentially Hamas.

That's also touched upon here by a former British commander.

I have no doubt... Islamic Jihad behind horrific blast at Gaza hospital

I have no doubt the horrific blast at Al Ahli Hospital was the work of Iran-sponsored Islamic Jihad, the second most dangerous terrorist group in the Gaza Strip.

www.express.co.uk

'Should we believe the Israelis? In my extensive experience of conflict in Israel, the IDF invariably admits when they make errors that result in civilian deaths.'
'As usual, much of the media has faithfully parroted Gaza Health Ministry casualty figures for this attack, failing to reflect that the ministry is controlled by Hamas.'

 

[3C's]

Organized protests, open letters, and stuff like are different and are more worthy of consideration IMO.

You mean like the "die in" at Harvard?

I get that people want an end to the violence but they're blaming Israel for the explosion in this stunt at Harvard. 0 objectivity.

 

[Joe Bryant]

My comment about respecting or not respecting "commentary" is not intended to call out anyone here - it was in the context we were talking about - news sources and commentary on Twitter and the like. That could have been worded better.

Thanks @CletiusMaximus Same for me.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

Organized protests, open letters, and stuff like are different and are more worthy of consideration IMO.

You mean like the "die in" at Harvard?

I get that people want an end to the violence but they're blaming Israel for the explosion in this stunt at Harvard. 0 objectivity.

Yes, but this is a topic where I know I am over-sampling. "Look at these weirdos in higher ed" occupies approximately the same place in my feed as "Hooray for Josh Allen," which is to say that I probably self-select for more of that than your average person.

 

[AAABatteries]

Wanted to say thanks to Joe for keeping the thread open - I find myself agreeing with everybody in here saying traditional media is unwatchable and unreadable. That along with my long disdain for social media means I stay almost totally uninformed about basically everything. I live in a bubble and FBGs truly is where I get a good portion of my news. I'm not saying that's a good thing in general but it's a good thing for my mental health.

 

[Joe Bryant]

I'm not questioning that it's been reported as such.

Thanks. To make sure I understand, you said, "FWIW.....The only place I've seen this number of 500 is here in the FFA". I thought that meant you thought the FFA was the only place talking about that.

But you agree much of mainstream media was reporting the number of 500 or at least "hundreds". You don't mean you're only getting your news from the FFA for news do you?

 

[Fat Nick]

Is there any evidence whatsoever, other than the word of these two people that I cannot possibly assess

But his name is Adnan with no last name! In who, if not Adnan, can you trust?

Adnan is the American version of Nick. Nick is your pal, he's your buddy.

I approve.

-Fat Adnan

 

[Joe Bryant]

Side tangent note.

I've been a long time paying NYTimes subscriber.

This podcast from several years ago stuck with me. It's Terry Gross interviewing David Carr (not that David Carr ) He was a super interesting reporter and author.

One thing that stood out was how high the standards were for accuracy at the Times. Obviously, he was biased but I thought it was fascinating. And it fit with my impression at the time.

Interview here. https://freshairarchive.org/segment...self-part-pirate-part-thug-also-decent-person

Here's the transcript section about accuracy:

GROSS: So just one - another thing about how your journalism is changing because it's on different platforms: When one of your articles is in The New York Times online, if there's any mistakes that were made in the article, those mistakes are corrected at the bottom of the article.

It used to be that corrections were kind of buried in, like, page two or something, nobody ever saw them. So your mistakes, your errors weren't, like, following you around. But they are now. What's that experience like of having the mistakes corrected at the bottom of the article?

CARR: You know, I have to tell you, when I got to The New York Times - which was about 10 years ago - I was paralyzed by the idea that my reporting lacked the professionalism and efficacy required to be in The New York Times. I had done a lot of writing and done a lot of reporting, but I now was at a place where kind of the size of the megaphone and its sort of history made it all the more powerful. And then if I said something that was unfair or untrue, that I could snap somebody's career in half like a dry winter twig.

And sure enough, after I started, I quickly ended up on page two, in the corrections. And you used the term buried. They're not buried to us. That is a hall of shame there, and it's a page you want to totally stay off of. And it's material to your sort of career there. So it's very, very important. And it doesn't matter where error occurs, it always follows you around.

And part of the deal with working at The New York Times is that your readers - a portion of whom are kind of church ladies and copy-ninnies and fact-freaks - they wait like crows on a wire for you to make the slightest error and then descend, caw, caw, cawing every time you screw up. And it still is something that I - that wakes me up at night. After I've written something, I wonder if I got something right.

And so the fact that now they follow me around like tin cans on the Internet, at least on the Web...

(LAUGHTER)

CARR: ...At least on the Web, you can amend. You know, the ethic of the Web is to say what you know as quickly as you can, and then reiterate over and over again. The Web is kind of a self-cleaning oven, and what you have up there could grow more efficacious, more accurate as time goes by. That's never true of print. It's always there for the ages, to haunt you if you got it wrong.

The whole thing is worth a listen as he was a fascinating guy. But the accuracy thing was interesting and how he saw it back then.

 

[The Commish]

I'm not questioning that it's been reported as such.

Thanks. To make sure I understand, you said, "FWIW.....The only place I've seen this number of 500 is here in the FFA". I thought that meant you thought the FFA was the only place talking about that.

But you agree much of mainstream media was reporting the number of 500 or at least "hundreds". You don't mean you're only getting your news from the FFA for news do you?

I meant, none of my media sources were talking about the 500 number. I saw ONE source mention the "hundreds" (which given the circumstances, isn't out of the realm of possibilities). I can't tell you what our US mainstream media was reporting, but I did see it being reported here and those reports were referencing our mainstream media. The FFA (FBG in general really) is my only meaningful insight into what the US media machine is saying these days....been that way for about 7ish years now.

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

The whole thing is worth a listen as he was a fascinating guy. But the accuracy thing was interesting and how he saw it back then.

I know a bunch of reporters and worked at one of the biggest megaphones once upon a time (not in the news room), and most of them would rather eat a maggot squirming in a turd than make a mistake in print.

The opinion stuff can be different -- but the reporters/news folks care a ton about getting the facts right.

I do think the pressure to keep up with live coverage of breaking news that you call follow on the socials has probably eroded the time available to get all the facts right, but they still correct the mistakes when they find them.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

I find myself agreeing with everybody in here saying traditional media is unwatchable and unreadable. That along with my long disdain for social media means I stay almost totally uninformed about basically everything.

Download the AP (associated press) app. It's strictly news reporting with no political bias - just straight news.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

Israel has now agreed to allow Egypt to deliver humanitarian aid (food, water and supplies) to Gaza. No word on if Egypt will now open it's border to refugees as a result.

 

[Jayrod]

Israel has now agreed to allow Egypt to deliver humanitarian aid (food, water and supplies) to Gaza. No word on if now Egypt will open it's border to refugees as a result.

We discussed this earlier and I never found a real answer, but how was Israel keeping Egypt from delivering aid? The trucks were at the border and Egypt controls one side of the gate and Palestinians are on the other side. I don't believe Israel has any soldiers right there, so unless Israel was threatening to blow up the trucks after they moved into Gaza (REALLY bad PR move), not sure how they were "not allowing" them to deliver the aid.

IMO, Egypt is actually working with Israel in some capacity and Israel probably just told them they didn't want them to deliver the aid and Egypt just went along with it. Physically, Israel has no control over that gate and what moves in or out.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

We discussed this earlier and I never found a real answer, but how was Israel keeping Egypt from delivering aid? The trucks were at the border and Egypt controls one side of the gate and Palestinians are on the other side. I don't believe Israel has any soldiers right there, so unless Israel was threatening to blow up the trucks after they moved into Gaza (REALLY bad PR move), not sure how they were "not allowing" them to deliver the aid.

I'm just reporting facts reported by the AP. Since they did agree to allow it, I assume there was some impediment to doing so. They have been bombing the southern region so maybe there was some concern.
Maybe you're right that it wasn't necessary but it's been put out there by various sources.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

Israel has now agreed to allow Egypt to deliver humanitarian aid (food, water and supplies) to Gaza. No word on if now Egypt will open it's border to refugees as a result.

We discussed this earlier and I never found a real answer, but how was Israel keeping Egypt from delivering aid? The trucks were at the border and Egypt controls one side of the gate and Palestinians are on the other side. I don't believe Israel has any soldiers right there, so unless Israel was threatening to blow up the trucks after they moved into Gaza (REALLY bad PR move), not sure how they were "not allowing" them to deliver the aid.

IMO, Egypt is actually working with Israel in some capacity and Israel probably just told them they didn't want them to deliver the aid and Egypt just went along with it. Physically, Israel has no control over that gate and what moves in or out.

Here’s the article:

Palestinians trapped in Gaza find nowhere is safe during Israel's relentless bombing

Israeli airstrikes have pounded locations across the Gaza Strip, including parts of the south that Israel had declared as safe zones.

apnews.com

 

[Jayrod]

We discussed this earlier and I never found a real answer, but how was Israel keeping Egypt from delivering aid? The trucks were at the border and Egypt controls one side of the gate and Palestinians are on the other side. I don't believe Israel has any soldiers right there, so unless Israel was threatening to blow up the trucks after they moved into Gaza (REALLY bad PR move), not sure how they were "not allowing" them to deliver the aid.

I'm just reporting facts reported by the AP. Since they did agree to allow it, I assume there was some impediment to doing so. They have been bombing the southern region so maybe there was some concern.
Maybe you're right that it wasn't necessary but it's been put out there by various sources so believe what you want.

Oh, I know it was what has been reported. My questions are really for anyone that has an answer. It just seems like a little wink-wink from Egypt to save face with the rest of the Muslim world and say that Israel "wouldn't let them" deliver the aid when in reality they are working with the Israelis on Gaza.

I personally believe (have no links on this) that Egypt has NO desire to let the likes of Hamas into their country after the havoc the Muslim Brotherhood has wrought on their social structure and government. They really don't have any motivation to help the Palestinians outside of general goodwill from other Muslim nations and the world.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

For those praising AP for their reporting, I have some bad news for you.

Here's is a story from AP that just came out today. Give it a read. I want to focus on something in particular here, but it's worth reading the story first.

Read it? Okay, let's move on. Here's the part I want to draw your attention to. They're discussing the hospital strike:

U.S. President Joe Biden, who visited Israel on Wednesday, said data from his Defense Department showed the explosion was not likely caused by an Israeli airstrike. The White House later said an analysis of “overhead imagery, intercepts and open-source information” showed Israel was not behind the attack. But the U.S. continues to collect evidence.

Video from the scene showed the hospital grounds strewn with torn bodies, many of them young children. Hundreds of wounded were rushed to Gaza City’s main hospital, where doctors already facing critical supply shortages were sometimes forced to perform surgery on the floors, without anesthesia.

Look at the first sentence of the second paragraph. "Video from the scene showed the hospital grounds strewn with torn bodies, many of them young children." Yikes! That sounds really bad. And there's a link there and everything, so they've got receipts backing this up. How terrible that all those people died.

Except . . . click the link. You'll go to this story, which was published on 10/17. See if you can find a video from the scene of al-Ahli hospital showing any torn bodies. Hit ctrl-F and see if that story even mentions the hospital in question. (Spoiler: The video does not exist and the story does not mention the hospital). The link in the first story absolutely does not in any way support the claim that is being made. They are making up a "source" and hoping that you won't click through the link to check whether their source says what they say it says. The authors are lying to you.

People do this all the time. I make it a habit to click through these source-links from time to time, and I'd say it's about 50-50 as to whether the source actually backs the author up or not. This is an excellent habit to get into.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

For those praising AP for their reporting, I have some bad news for you.

Here's is a story from AP that just came out today. Give it a read. I want to focus on something in particular here, but it's worth reading the story first.

Read it? Okay, let's move on. Here's the part I want to draw your attention to. They're discussing the hospital strike:

I linked that same story - seems unbiased to me. People see what they want though.

 

[The Commish]

Israel has now agreed to allow Egypt to deliver humanitarian aid (food, water and supplies) to Gaza. No word on if now Egypt will open it's border to refugees as a result.

We discussed this earlier and I never found a real answer, but how was Israel keeping Egypt from delivering aid? The trucks were at the border and Egypt controls one side of the gate and Palestinians are on the other side. I don't believe Israel has any soldiers right there, so unless Israel was threatening to blow up the trucks after they moved into Gaza (REALLY bad PR move), not sure how they were "not allowing" them to deliver the aid.

IMO, Egypt is actually working with Israel in some capacity and Israel probably just told them they didn't want them to deliver the aid and Egypt just went along with it. Physically, Israel has no control over that gate and what moves in or out.

I thought the roads were destroyed and needed to be repaired before the trucks could pass.

 

[John123]

For those praising AP for their reporting, I have some bad news for you.

Here's is a story from AP that just came out today. Give it a read. I want to focus on something in particular here, but it's worth reading the story first.

Read it? Okay, let's move on. Here's the part I want to draw your attention to. They're discussing the hospital strike:

I linked that same story - seems unbiased to me. People see what they want though.

A story can be "unbiased" but be factually incorrect. That is IK's point.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

For those praising AP for their reporting, I have some bad news for you.

Here's is a story from AP that just came out today. Give it a read. I want to focus on something in particular here, but it's worth reading the story first.

Read it? Okay, let's move on. Here's the part I want to draw your attention to. They're discussing the hospital strike:

I linked that same story - seems unbiased to me. People see what they want though.

A story can be "unbiased" but be factually incorrect. That is IK's point.

I understand - I don't think they generally get much wrong since they take a measured approach (and I didn't find that case he pointed out particularly egregious).

I find it a nice unaffiliated and unbiased news source that other news sources draw from. Some like Twitter, which is fine. To each their own.

I do think people seek sources that confirm their particular biases. I don't think that's a shocking statement and I don't claim to be immune to it - but since I hate both political parties equally (what they've become at least), I don't think I'm biased in that regard so enjoy my news to take a moderate approach as well.