Reply to US main stream media is biased towards Israel. True or false? Why?

Forum Index » Political Discussion

Reply to "US main stream media is biased towards Israel. True or false? Why? "

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]There’s a post on the NYT but what about other media in the US?

True.

I’m not talking about big statements in one direction, but more subtle coverage. This has impact, however.

Examples I’ve noticed. 
Very limited photos of Israel’s atrocities. 
Frequent personal stories and photos of Israeli and Jewish victims, with very limited ones about Palestinians 
Use of passive voice when describing atrocities 
Referral to the conflict as a ‘war’ (implies equality) ‘with Hamas’- as if Israel is fighting with Hamas, and not slaughtering innocents

I’ve been listening to public radio the last two days and even they do this -
1. A long personal piece yesterday on an iraqi Jew who was forced to leave Iraq in 1969. 
2. Segment from someone arguing that Gaza is not a genocide, and that plenty of food has been delivered. 
3. References to the ‘war against Hamas’ 
4. Passive voice ‘gazans are suffering hunger’. Not ‘Israel is starving Palestinians’ 
[/quote]

OP, I've also listened to public radio in the past 24 hours, so heard most of the pieces you're referencing.

To start, #1 was about an Iraqi Jew AND an Iraqi Muslim (father of the reporter who did the story), both of whom were forced to leave, but became lifelong friends.

https://www.npr.org/2025/07/28/nx-s1-5472175/a-personal-tale-of-an-iraqi-friendship-that-has-defied-religion-and-conflict
And 
The second person (a West Point researcher who admitted that his sources were Israeli, and faced pointed questions from the interviewer) was immediately preceded by an Israeli researcher who says it's genocide.

https://www.npr.org/2025/07/29/nx-s1-5478643/war-scholar-discusses-why-he-does-not-think-there-is-a-genocide-in-gaza
https://www.npr.org/2025/07/29/nx-s1-5482830/two-prominent-israeli-rights-groups-say-israel-is-committing-genocide-in-gaza

All of which was preceded by a briefer piece that says there's not enough food: https://www.npr.org/2025/07/29/nx-s1-5482873/food-that-israel-allows-into-gaza-only-a-fraction-of-whats-needed-aid-groups-say

And this: https://www.npr.org/2025/07/29/nx-s1-5483520/gaza-famine-hunger

So, really? I have no dog in this fight, but find your characterization of those specific stories rather disingenuous.[/quote]

Thanks for your feedback. You don’t seem to understand subtleties and overall context, however. I am not saying any one individual piece is wrong, but it’s the totality of the coverage that I take issue with.

I’ll note that my comments still stand.

The first piece was on a friendship of a Muslim and a Jewish man, but the focus of the interview was on the Jewish man and his experiences. There’s nothing wrong with that in isolation, but again, it’s the personalization of one sides experience far more than the other sides that strikes me. I see this again and again.

There was a rather extensive interview with the West Point guy defending Israel’s actions in Gaza and blaming the starvation on the UN even. Again, fine, but it greatly outweighed any discussion of the opposite view point.

Gaza was referred to repeatedly (nut just by the WP guy) as the ‘war in Gaza’ and the ‘war against Hamas’. That’s quite a mischaracterization, don’t you think? A war implies equality in fighting. Palestinians are being starved and slaughtered. Are the children fighting?

And again, the use of passive voice. ‘Gazans are experiencing hunger’ rather than ‘Israel is starving the population’ [/quote]

Lol, if you're concerned about subtleties, perhaps you'd consider that you felt the Iraqi Jew "was the focus" of the interview because the other subject of the story did not speak English. There were more direct quotes, and only background clips of the other man speaking Arabic.

And I'd note that the West Point interview apparently clocked in at 6 minutes according to the link, while the stories about genocide add up to more. Yet you see it as outweighing discussion?

Again, I have no side here, except the one against people not recognizing their own biases. Your points are only standing because you're saying they do.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics