Killed By Who? How Western Media Hides Israeli War Crimes, Pt.1 - Waqar Ahmed

[u/LoserDisappointment]

https://waqarahmed.org/killed-by-who-how-western-media-hides-israeli-war-crimes-pt-1

[u/AutoModerator]

Thanks for posting, u/LoserDisappointment!

Please Upvote + Crosspost!

Welcome to r/BoringDystopia: Showcasing the idea that we live in a dystopia that is boring! Enjoyed the content? Give it an upvote and consider Crossposting it on related subreddits.

Before you dive in, subscribe and review the rules. If you spot rule violations, report them.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/LoserDisappointment]

Hello everyone,

I'm an author & journalist from Islamabad, PK. I've written a report that explores a range of Western media headlines on Palestinian airstrikes and mass-killings. We review how Western media twists and reports only the half-truth in headlines, as to create ambiguity in who was the criminal behind the killings of civilians. The name 'Israel' is not included in headlines, suggesting that it is unclear who the killer was, and sometimes even implies Hamas. Other times, headlines are redacted to make Israel look like the victim.

Israeli soldiers are described as 'men in military fatigues', while airstrikes that kill Gazan homes are reduced to 'strikes in area'.

I'm starting my blog with western imperialism as its focus, with ethos to post only credibly sourced and objective blogs. I have a small collection already prepped to read.

If you like my work, please consider following me on Twitter / X or to my free email subscription option in the blog.

Thank you.

[u/No-Caregiver8049]

I feel a lot of the ambiguity can be explained by the speed the stories go live. They’re later tweaked as new information becomes available. Many of the stories you reference go from ‘uncertain” to “more certain”. This isn’t necessarily a bad thing for the reporting agency as accusations can be problematic politically and legally. They’re also difficult to retract.

I sure you’re aware that Pakestani news outlets also have bias that lead to riots and in some cases, killings. The sensationalism, lack of diversity, and ties to political and military leaders are well documented. I’d rather have a more restrained press that takes the time to accurately report than a rumor mill.

Honestly, everyone knows who shot this woman. It’s been extensively reported. Yes, early reports were more unsure. This doesn’t imply nefarious intent, just momentary uncertainty. Reporting isn’t static - news stories evolve.

[u/LoserDisappointment → u/No-Caregiver8049]

Besides the American woman's murder, all of these articles are not 'latest' in sense that they're developing stories. They are well-established, well-known stories that mention Israel within the body, while going extreme lengths to hide Israel in the headlines. The thesis here is that most people are either turned down by paywalls, or skim through headlines.

All of these articles have since been edited multiple times, evidenced by the Wayback machine. They've had time to attribute Israel properly in the headlines, but they do not do so deliberately.

I don't understand your comment about Pakistani news outlets. Have I said that they are accurate or reliable?

[u/No-Caregiver8049 → u/LoserDisappointment]

Well:

Articles are sometimes edited for a variety of reasons. This has happened since media began.

in some of your examples, the agency is the same, but the reporter byline is different. This happens when stories are edited. In one case (The Reuters article) the headline changes to include an Israeli claim. This seems in line with my hypothesis as time would need to pass for the story to be published and a response to the story reported.

If you’re typing all this in order to claim “readers just skim through headlines” to read through headlines, why do you think they’ll read your blog?

Paywalls. Ah, paywalls. Thats where the good reporting is? Maybe. But it’s 2024. Most people get their information from X or TikTok. Not Reuters. Reddit maybe

If you're spending all this effort trying to tell me that people are easily misled and have the attention span of a 15 second video, you’re about 10 years too late. privacy went first, then critical thinking. We lost.

Don’t misinterpret what I’m saying. It’s great youre putting your truth out there. The long form stuff just doesn’t work anymore. I suspect your headlines are much the same as all the others: the whole story.