That would be a correct reading if it wasn’t for the small (tiny, miniscule, tinsy winsy) detail that when it comes to what the IDF or the Israeli government allege this very newspaper actually uses words like “stated” instead of “alleged”.
(Similarly to how they write for Israeli soldiers that they “are killed” whilst for Palestinians the form used is the passive one: they “die”)
It’s the double standard that makes it propaganda rather than journalism - Journalists would go to great lengths to treat both sides exactly the same.
Yeah the BBC has been credibly accused of this and surely other MSM sources. In this exact case, the detained are quite actually alleging mistreatment, which has been corroborated by others there, but not proven. The IDF thugs are responding to the allegations with a statement, they don’t allege back. I dunno, of all the examples of double standards, this one seems most innocuous, but i do take your point.
Israel’s foreign ministry has dismissed all claims of mistreatment of members of the flotilla as “brazen lies”, posting on X: “All the detainees’ legal rights are fully upheld.”
would instead have been
Israel’s foreign ministry claimed that all allegations of mistreatment of members of the flotilla were “brazen lies”, posting on X: “All the detainees’ legal rights are fully upheld.”
Instead the word “dismissed” was used, which is less negative than “claimed” or “alleged”, being instead at the same level as “said” which is neutral.
In the English language claiming and alleging carry an implied judgement of “possibly false, requires proof”, unlike saying or even dismissing which are purelly neutral and carry no implied judgement whatsoever on the truthfulness of the words.
In The Guardian the flottila members make “allegations” and “claims” - implying that they need to prove it - whilst the Israeli minister who called them “terrorists” a few days ago (a pretty good indication he’s a shameless liar) merely says things thus not implying that proof required to back what he says.
Had they been trying to be impeccably neutral they would’ve used “said” or equivalent for both sides as those are 100% neutral, avoiding for both sides words that imply that something requires proof .
I get the semantics, but “allege” is standard journalistic practice. Reporting on it is calling it out.
That would be a correct reading if it wasn’t for the small (tiny, miniscule, tinsy winsy) detail that when it comes to what the IDF or the Israeli government allege this very newspaper actually uses words like “stated” instead of “alleged”.
(Similarly to how they write for Israeli soldiers that they “are killed” whilst for Palestinians the form used is the passive one: they “die”)
It’s the double standard that makes it propaganda rather than journalism - Journalists would go to great lengths to treat both sides exactly the same.
Yeah the BBC has been credibly accused of this and surely other MSM sources. In this exact case, the detained are quite actually alleging mistreatment, which has been corroborated by others there, but not proven. The IDF thugs are responding to the allegations with a statement, they don’t allege back. I dunno, of all the examples of double standards, this one seems most innocuous, but i do take your point.
If they were treated equally:
would instead have been
Instead the word “dismissed” was used, which is less negative than “claimed” or “alleged”, being instead at the same level as “said” which is neutral.
In the English language claiming and alleging carry an implied judgement of “possibly false, requires proof”, unlike saying or even dismissing which are purelly neutral and carry no implied judgement whatsoever on the truthfulness of the words.
In The Guardian the flottila members make “allegations” and “claims” - implying that they need to prove it - whilst the Israeli minister who called them “terrorists” a few days ago (a pretty good indication he’s a shameless liar) merely says things thus not implying that proof required to back what he says.
Had they been trying to be impeccably neutral they would’ve used “said” or equivalent for both sides as those are 100% neutral, avoiding for both sides words that imply that something requires proof .
I think the standard should be removed
As I’ve said, journalists that feel so comfortable giving a free pass to Israel should go hang out there a while.
:)