314
Reuters invents a new word for "torture" (lemmy.ml)
submitted 2 months ago by [M] to c/ManufacturingConsent@lemmy.ml
37 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 5 points 2 months ago* (1 child)

My own paragraph? You mean the very first one of the Reuters article being disingenuously shown but not linked here? I'm literally showing that Reuters covered this essentially immediately within the article about the mockery – and that there are others without the mockery as the focus.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] 4 points 2 months ago* (3 children)

    Yes it's not in the title. Title's are basically all that matters in the news because nobody reads articles. I'll give Reuters some props though since they just released an article about the abuse of the activists and they're basically the only ones which mention rape in the title.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    Title's are basically all that matters in the news because nobody reads articles.

    Well I guess no wonder people have terrible reading comprehension..

    I'll give Reuters some props

    I still don't get what reuters has done wrong..

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] 0 points 2 months ago* (1 child)

    Just imagine if the video actually was showing Uyghurs in China. Would the headline say:

    "Outrage grows after Chinese minister mocks Uyghurs"?

    Two things would change: firstly China would be held responsible. Not one single Chinese minister. Second it would contain the word torture and/or worse.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (1 child)

    "Outrage grows after Chinese minister mocks Uyghurs"?

    If a Chinese minister posted a video of himself mocking Uyghurs and that video generated outrage, that headline would be pretty reasonable, no?

    The specific news story referenced in this post is about minister Ben-Gvir posting a video where he mocks the detainees. The article says "Minister mocks detainees". Please tell me what the ideal headline should be, I'm very curious.

    firstly China would be held responsible. Not one single Chinese minister. Second it would contain the word torture and/or worse.

    Ok, and you think that makes for a better headline?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] 5 points 2 months ago (2 children)

    If a Chinese minister posted a video of himself mocking Uyghurs and that video generated outrage, that headline would be pretty reasonable, no?

    No it would say "China" not "Chinese minister". This isn't some fringe thing the Israeli minister did on his own. It's national policy under full responsibility of all of Israel.

    France has quite literally used this logic put all the blame on one single person (who doesn't care about France anyway) and take absolutely no real action against Israel. This is not an accident, this is intentional.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (1 child)

    This isn't some fringe thing the Israeli minister did on his own. It's national policy under full responsibility of all of Israel.

    The article is about a video posted on twitter by Ben-Gvir. Of course he isn't doing it on his own for personal fun, of course he is doing it on behalf of Israel, but the headline is still pretty reasonable.

    But since you agree, please, I beg you to enlighten me. What should the headline be?

    France has quite literally used this logic put all the blame on one single person (who doesn't care about France anyway) and take absolutely no real action against Israel. This is not an accident, this is intentional.

    Not just France, virtually every western country and Israel itself is doing that. That's literally what the article you posted is reporting on:

    Poland's foreign minister called for Ben-Gvir to be banned from entering the country.

    The U.S. ambassador to Israel, Mike Huckabee, said Ben-Gvir had "betrayed (the) dignity of his nation".

    Netanyahu said Ben-Gvir's conduct was "not in line with Israel's values and norms".

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] 1 point 2 months ago (1 child)

    "Outrage after Israel releases video abusing of flotilla activists taken hostage on international waters" would be a good start.

    The reason why people often get confused in the community is because headlines can be factually correct, but the headlines would look completely differently if it was an adversary of the US doing the same things. Either using much more emotive language, or even going to speculation levels about things which never happened. See also the titles of the of October 7 rape hoax media spam which we now know never happened and had absolutely zero evidence.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago

    "Outrage after Israel releases video abusing of flotilla activists taken hostage on international waters" would be a good start.

    But that's the thing. The outrage is seems to be less about the detention and abuse, but more about the public humiliation and mockery..

    The narrative is something like "It's justified they were detained, a little bit of force is to be expected, and it probably wasn't as bad since the activists lie in order to make Israel look bad".

    But when you have the security minister posting a video where he is gleefully and proudly mocking detainees, that's going too far. It robs the situation of any plausible deniability and forces the origin countries of the activists to express public outrage.

    You can bet your ass that if the video was not posted, the expressed outrage of the various countries would be minimal in comparison.

    the headlines would look completely differently if it was an adversary of the US doing the same things.

    Once again, I'm familiar with the concept of media bias.. I still think the headline is perfectly readonable.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent