Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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’

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.

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’

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Those “innocents” voted in terrorists that tortured and murdered innocent people first. Terrorists that they’re still supporting today. Why did you leave that part out?

And further train the children to hate and kill Jews

And what do you think the IDF is doing? Every accusation is a confession from Zionists, brainwashed from their "birthright Israel" trips.

Jewish children learn to fear sirens and sneak attacks

DP
Idk the US Jewish kids I know (and those who are now adults) were educated to think that Israel is their right and entitlement, and that the locals there are savages. Is that really any less evil?

Israel is their own. That's the entire point of Israel. Do they think the "locals" are savages? Not that I've ever heard. Nice try, though.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Those “innocents” voted in terrorists that tortured and murdered innocent people first. Terrorists that they’re still supporting today. Why did you leave that part out?

And further train the children to hate and kill Jews

And what do you think the IDF is doing? Every accusation is a confession from Zionists, brainwashed from their "birthright Israel" trips.

Jewish children learn to fear sirens and sneak attacks

DP
Idk the US Jewish kids I know (and those who are now adults) were educated to think that Israel is their right and entitlement, and that the locals there are savages. Is that really any less evil?

Israel is their own. That's the entire point of Israel. Do they think the "locals" are savages? Not that I've ever heard. Nice try, though.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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’

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.

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’

+1
Meanwhile, in contrast, October 7 is typically referred to in the active voice with specific language such as ‘Hamas’s brutal terrorist attack’ or ‘Hamas’s massacre’ while aggression in the opposite direction (many multiples of aggression) is referred to in sanitized terms such as ‘the starvation situation’

What are your news sources? I rarely if ever hear Oct 7 referred to. This is not "The Gaza War." It is the Hamas War. Say it like it is. Hamas started this and they could end it if they wanted to.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Those “innocents” voted in terrorists that tortured and murdered innocent people first. Terrorists that they’re still supporting today. Why did you leave that part out?

And further train the children to hate and kill Jews

And what do you think the IDF is doing? Every accusation is a confession from Zionists, brainwashed from their "birthright Israel" trips.

Jewish children learn to fear sirens and sneak attacks

DP
Idk the US Jewish kids I know (and those who are now adults) were educated to think that Israel is their right and entitlement, and that the locals there are savages. Is that really any less evil?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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’

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.

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’

+1
Meanwhile, in contrast, October 7 is typically referred to in the active voice with specific language such as ‘Hamas’s brutal terrorist attack’ or ‘Hamas’s massacre’ while aggression in the opposite direction (many multiples of aggression) is referred to in sanitized terms such as ‘the starvation situation’

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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’

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.

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’

Anonymous wrote:Those “innocents” voted in terrorists that tortured and murdered innocent people first. Terrorists that they’re still supporting today. Why did you leave that part out?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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’

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.

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’

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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’

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.

Anonymous wrote: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’

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Those “innocents” voted in terrorists that tortured and murdered innocent people first. Terrorists that they’re still supporting today. Why did you leave that part out?

And further train the children to hate and kill Jews

And what do you think the IDF is doing? Every accusation is a confession from Zionists, brainwashed from their "birthright Israel" trips.

Jewish children learn to fear sirens and sneak attacks