• @WamGams@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    17 months ago

    Besides NPR (which itself does not do international on the ground reporting) which of your sources are state funded? Specifically which of them are funded by a right wing theocracy?

    None. That is the difference. Fox News might overtly hate gay people, but are they funded by people who have courts which prosecute homosexuality?

    We should prevent that sort of stuff at home and disavow it abroad. Especially if we are leftists, no?

    • mozzOP
      link
      fedilink
      17 months ago

      You didn’t really answer the question.

      Does that mean that your whole assertion that Al Jazeera was dangerous evil terrorist garbage is retracted now? I would say that they are roughly speaking a mirror image for the New York Times or similar “Israel is fine, please look away from this dead baby at this story about Hamas instead” minded paper. Or is the New York Times also dangerous and evil? Or does it work in only one direction, or how?

      Someone could say that the New York Times is funded by a mindless money-driven machine which seeks only profit, and all its coverage needs to be defined in that light, and so we can safely discard anything it has to say. I wouldn’t say that. But it does make arguably an equal amount of sense to discarding Al Jazeera because they’re funded in part by a theocratic monarchy. I would say we should judge them primarily on their output and journalistic standards.

      • @WamGams@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        17 months ago

        I would say in this specific situation, Al Jazeerah is more of a participie in the Israel-Palestine war than the New York times is.

        I however don’t read the New York times and have no ability to defend them, since I cut out corporate media from my life years ago.