The same Israeli soldier has posted video clips showing soldiers arresting dozens of men, women and children who were stripped, blindfolded and handcuffed in areas across Gaza.
Why is torturing in quotes?
They’re probably referencing someone else’s words. Journalism generally requires sources otherwise you risk libel.
Generally if you see quotes in journalism, it’s not the sarcastic use you often see on social media. It’s more of a legal safeguard.
It’s just a little torture, not real torture. 😇
If it does not come from the torture region it’s only sparkling violence.
deleted by creator
Its ok everyone. He’s allowed to do that, he’s Israeli. Criticising his actions is anti semetic.
Anyone else noticing Middle East Monitor never lists author names?
Also, large portions of their articles seem to be literal copy>paste from major outlets such as Reuters.
One example:
Staff and equipment are in such short supply in Gaza’s European Hospital that medical teams are having to make agonising decisions about whom to accept, doctors said, leaving many patients with severe life-threatening injuries untreated, Reuters reports.
Reuters attribution guidelines require you to attribute it to Reuters not their journalist.
I find it interesting how dedicated you are to trying to attack the source rather than the contents.
Reuters attribution guidelines clearly don’t allow for copying the whole article word for word. That’s not the only paragraph…
Edit: To further clarify, MEMO doesn’t list who wrote any of their own articles… I suspect it’s because they are all either anonymous with little fact checking and/or written by generative AI.
Yes they do.
MEMO operates as a non-profit Media Monitor, that means they republish news from other sources. Both MEMO and Reuters operate out of the UK and if MEMO were illegally copying their content, they would have been shut-down by now.
Frankly you are are obsessed with trying to discredit a perfectly valid organisation just because they have a pro-Palestinian bias instead of a Pro-Israeli. They have done nothing wrong.
According to Ehud Rosen, MEMO generally supports Islamist positions within Palestinian politics. According to Andrew Gilligan, the Middle East Monitor promotes a strongly pro-Muslim Brotherhood and pro-Hamas viewpoint. Anshel Pfeffer described MEMO as a “conspiracy theory-peddling anti-Israel organisation”. Our review shows that the Middle East Monitor has a left wing bias in the use of loaded words and also in story choices that promote Islamic positions. We could not find any instances of the Middle East Monitor failing fact checks, but they do sometimes source to questionable media outlets and hence garner a Mixed factual rating.
“We couldn’t find any instances od it failing fact checks” then why the fuck is it “a mixed factual check”?
Wait media bias check is extremely biased???
🙃
Go to their website and read about their methods. You’re in for a laugh.
Yeah it’s great. But makes it more disappointing to see people actually using it/treating it like gospel
They use it as a weapon more than anything.
They’re using a dude from “The Telegraph” in their criticism section.
The Telegraph is a right wing pro israel tabloid that tells you all you need to know.
MBFC is has some really pathetic sourcing for their “debunking”.
On MBFC pro israel sites are highly factual, pro Palestinian sites are “mixed”.
I am so close to waging a war on MBFC. Not a single one of them is actually an expert… And they think it’s a “strength” that they made up an unscientific system to rate things.
Because that entire site is just one guy’s opinion presented as if it were objective fact. The claims credibility of sources reflects the guy’s biases and opinions and nothing more.
If you want an actual answer….
Middle East Monitor is a pretty small outlet, and not every source on MBFC has an extremely detailed report. It’s a valuable tool, but I would never call it definitive.
Ad Fontes doesn’t list them at all, which isn’t really surprising given the reach and size of MEMO.
Also, from MEMO’s website, they don’t try to be unbiased.
There has been a growing need for supporters of, in particular, the Palestinian cause, to master the art of information gathering, analysis and dissemination. This requires well organised, focused and targeted operations. Such initiatives are virtually non-existent in the West today.
The Middle East Monitor (MEMO) was established to fill this gap.
Edit: Upon further reading, I can’t help but notice none of their articles have author names attached.
Anshel Pfeffer
Pro-Israel Anshel Pfeffer doesn’t like pro-Arab messaging? Color me shocked
It is a credible source and meets the requirements set out in this subreddit.
Being criticised by right wingers does not take away the credibility, if anything it only adds to its.
Stop posting misinformation.
It’s “mixed” factual reporting, which is literally the minimum acceptable in this forum to not be removed, and has high anti-Israel, pro-Islamist bias. Citation above. It’s not what I’d consider a good source. Pointing this out is not, “misinformation.”
Oh no anti-Israel! How could anyone be against Israel. Every news source should be a pro-Israel mouthpiece or its garbage!
Mixed is the same rating The Guardian gets.
Removed by mod
Interesting you mention that:
https://apnews.com/article/china-palestinians-abbas-xinjiang-7aa4038f6a3302dcaaedd23d44e0a3de
Wow, that’s incredible. He was at ~20% approval rating among Palestinians, seems like he’s going for 0%.
hamas tortures people. IDF tortures people. i don’t even care who wins, as long as it’s total victory so as to put an end to this shit once and for all.
