International food charity World Central Kitchen (WCK) is suspending its operations in Gaza following the death of seven of its workers in an Israeli air strike.
The armored trucks were also clearly labeled with the charities logos.
This means the trucks were bombed intentionally, they were bombed when clearly identified as aid workers, or they were bombed indiscriminately.
None of the above is good for the IDF.
Most likely they will claim the “fog of war” was the issue and there will be non specific “changes” that they will make after a long delay, all while blaming aid organizations for not providing volunteers to stop the genocidal starvation they are causing.
You should understand why news is now inherently a horrible thing and modern day journalism is dead because of it. This is the same for when they readily use “terrorists” in news presses.
Maybe I’m above average here, but i feel like that’s already pretty obvious. AFAIK Israel is the only one currently genociding in Gaza. Now, if it WASNT Israel, that’d need the extra word.
You only get so many words in a title, news orgs tend to leave out the ones that don’t need more explanation.
it isn’t obvious to anyone reading mainstream news. news orgs are bending over backwards to obfuscate who’s actually doing the killing (one particularly egregious example being the NYT writing a whole-ass haiku instead of stating that Israeli soldiers opened fire on Palestinians seeking aid). sure, this particular headline would be ok if it was common knowledge that Israel is causing the wanton destruction in Gaza, but thanks to every other headline being like this, it isn’t
ABC News in Australia has been using the passive voice everywhere in regards to Israel until they simply couldn’t avoid it any longer now that Israel has killed an Australian aid worker.
I’ve seen articles that said 1,200 Israelis killed by Hamas and then the next sentence said 32,000 Palestinians killed…but didn’t say by Israel.
The juxtaposition of those two sentences may lead some people to think that Hamas killed those tens of thousands.
I agree with you regarding headlines, but the article text itself should make it very clear that the vast majority of civilians killed in this conflict were killed by the Israeli Occupation Forces.
There have been a couple of recent (post-October) studies into BBC coverage, the issue I raise concerning the language used in the title is consistent with its use of language elsewhere. For example, Israelis are “killed” and Palestinians “die”.
<span style="color:#323232;">"About 700 people have been killed in Israel since Hamas launched its attack on Saturday, with a further 500 having died in Gaza in retaliatory air strikes."
</span><span style="color:#323232;">"Some 1200 people have been killed in Israel, while more than 1000 have died in retaliatory air strikes on Gaza."
</span><span style="color:#323232;">"More than 700 people have been killed in Israel since Saturday and over 500 people have died in Gaza."
</span>
[…] the openDemocracy analysis found that the phrases “murder”, “murderous”, “mass murder”, “brutal murder” and “merciless murder” were used a total of 52 times by [BBC] journalists to refer to Israeli deaths – but never in relation to Palestinian deaths.
When I read this sort of coverage on a daily basis, I see these patterns repeated again and again, it’s a subtle reframing that many don’t notice but editors (and headline writers) at the BBC will be very aware of how they are using language. Space is not an excuse to remove the perpetrator from the picture regardless of how obvious that perpetrator might be, it is disingenuous.
Add comment