643
submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by Nighed@sffa.community to c/world@lemmy.world

I guess not strictly news - but with all of the vitriol I have seen in discussions on the Israel situation, that have boiled down to arguments over wording, I feel that this take from the BBC is worthy of some discussion.

Mods, feel free to remove if this is not newsy enough.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] mr47@kbin.social 6 points 1 year ago

So, basically: people performed atrocities. Are they evil? Maybe they are, maybe they aren't, the BBC has no idea whether it is evil to perform atrocities. Right.

[-] atetulo@lemm.ee 19 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

So basically, you can't read above a 2nd grade level.

BBC is saying they report the facts and let people make their own judgements. I know this might be hard for your biased mind to understand, but the word 'terrorist' has been thrown around so much it's practically meaningless. Heck, even when it should be applied (American terrorists shooting substations), it isn't. It's a political term at this point, nothing more.

You're trying to advocate for news outlets to tell us how to think instead of showing us information, which is shitty journalism for idiots.

[-] supercheesecake@aussie.zone 16 points 1 year ago

They are saying they do not use language that makes judgement, because that is not what they do. They are a neutral reporter of what is happening in the world (ie the news).

Everyone laments that “news” has been overrun by opinion journalism that tries to influence left or right. This is what “just news” looks like.

[-] HeartyBeast@kbin.social 12 points 1 year ago

No, they will report on the attrocities committed. Is it important for you for the BBC to tell you whether the attrocities are evil or not?

[-] specimen@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

I still can’t understand why naming Hamas a terrorist group goes against their “present only the facts” view. It’s the same group that raped and killed civilians just six days ago. They posted videos of their horrid raid on the internet and plan to stream hostage executions. These are facts, it is not subjective. Isn’t this the plain definition of terrorism? Why is BBC reluctant to brand a group that performs acts of terror as terrorists? This goes for how they treated IRA stories as well. I really can’t see how this adheres to good journalism principles, unlike many people here seem to be praising. It just seems to me a weird hill to die on.

this post was submitted on 11 Oct 2023
643 points (100.0% liked)

World News

39023 readers
1953 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS