#haaretz

[mysharona1987]

[theinconvenientlifestyle]

[unsolicited-opinions]

Is Haaretz a "good" source to learn about I/P issues? What about Al Jazeera or the Times of Israel?

[meta question] How did you figure out how to answer the two above questions? I know that newspapers do make mistakes, but I'm willing to forgive them if they make mistakes in good-faith and not because their reporters and/or editorial have an ideology of hatred and bias (either towards or against Israel / Jews / Palestine / Muslims). And I know every news source has bias, I'm just trying to think for myself and ask questions.

This is a bigger question than I'm ready to tackle right now, Anon, but I may be able to offer a couple thoughts.

The first rule of reading the news is to trust no one source, read broadly.

I think Al Jazeera and Middle East Eye can teach you a lot about what Qatar wants Western leftists to think. Not at all reliable for factual reporting.

I have been reading and watching a little from Al Arabiya (Saudi) lately and have mostly been impressed, but I haven't delved into it deeply.

I think The Jerusalem Post can show you what the Israeli right wants the anglophonic world to believe. On any given day, you can see its biases clearly by browsing its headlines. As for newsgathering and reporting...? Mostly factual, but always slanted to the right.

I think that The Times of Israel does the best (imperfect) job in English of avoiding blatant biases. It seems pretty centrist to me, but I'm told others view it as center-left. Look through the headlines and you'll notice those headlines are not generally emotionally charged. The editors are making an effort to report the news in a value-neutral manner without loaded language. I really like that. I haven't had any serious complaints about factual reporting. I recommend you avoid The Blogs.

Haaretz can teach you a lot about what highly educated leftist ashkenaz elites in Israel think will gain the attention of Western progressives/leftists, and also sometimes has important information and actual journalism.

But instead of having me (an American who can only read any of these outfits in English) attempt to describe the cultural placement and significance of Haaretz, give Israeli analyst (for The Times of Israel) Haviv Rettig Gur six minutes and he'll do a much better job:

If you see the value in this, watch the whole podcast (below) to see Haviv delve into this week's big piece from Haaretz to explain the infuriating way it manages to lie with misleading, loaded headlines...while also doing important reporting:

The next obvious question should be: What about Haviv's biases?

He has 'em, of course. Everybody does.

I like how Haviv puts his biases out on the table in full view. He's a bleeding heart liberal on social issues, he's hawkish on defense, he's the son of a Rabbi and a proud Zionist who understands the insanity of the West well enough to explain to us what we're blind to. He does not flinch from criticizing the Israeli government or the IDF (as you'll see in this podcast episode).

I have not yet seen him attempt to dissemble. He's comfortable saying "I don't know." I have seen him in dialogue with others where he'll readily concede someone else's good point even when he doesn't like it...or extend enormous amounts of patience because he appreciates sincerity and intellectual honesty...especially from people with whom he disagrees.

Haviv isn't always right, but he's always knowledgeable, intellectually honest, and open about his biases.

That's about as good as it gets in today's media landscape.

[reasonandempathy]

IDF Admits It Ran Gory Telegram Calling Palestinians ‘Roaches’ to be ‘Exterminated’

The Israeli military has been posting grotesque videos of dead Palestinians on a racist Telegram channel. It’s typical for the ‘anything goe

The Israeli military has been posting grotesque videos of dead Palestinians on a racist Telegram channel. It’s typical for the ‘anything goes’ platform. Representatives from the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) admitted to running a notoriously violent and racist Telegram channel following an investigation from Haaretz.  On October 9, 2023, the Telegram channel “72 Virgins—Uncensored” started posting gore-filled photos and videos from the frontlines of Israel’s war on Gaza. An investigation from Haaretz revealed in December that the Israeli military ran the channel. The IDF initially denied the accusation but reversed course after an internal investigation, Haaretz reported on Sunday. It’s an unsurprising revelation that highlights the grotesque appeal of Telegram, and how governments increasingly use the platform to spread propaganda. Videos and images on the channel included the dead bodies of Palestinian civilians and resistance fighters alongside racist text. “Exterminating the roaches…exterminating the Hamas rats…Share this beauty,” one post said above pictures of captured Palestinians. Another post showed an Israeli soldier dipping their gun into a liquid. “What a man!!!! Lubricates bullets with lard. You won’t get your virgins,” the text on the video said, according to a translation from Haaretz. In the past months, several unconfirmed videos have gone viral on social media purporting to show soldiers mocking Palestinians by dipping their bullets in pig fat, which is forbidden under Islam. Since October 7th, Nearly 30,000 Palestinians have been killed by the Israeli military in Gaza, where Israeli occupation forces have blocked almost all humanitarian aid from entering the densely-populated Palestinian territory.

Some quotes:

"What a man!!!!! Greases bullets with lard. You won't get your virgins."

""Garbage juice!!!! Another dead terrorist!! You have to watch it with the sound, you'll die laughing."

The IDF wants the world, and Israeli citizens, to know of and revel in their genocide.

[the-garbanzo-annex-jr]

'Haaretz, Lost in Translation,' Gaza 'Killing Field' Edition

CAMERA's 'Haaretz, Lost in Translation' tracker marks its bar mitzvah year, and the widely panned 'Killing Field' story is the Israeli daily

“Haaretz deliberately mistranslated its source material to feed an English-speaking audience a lie,” wrote military researcher Andrew Fox of the Henry Jackson Society, slamming the Israeli daily’s June 27 article, “It’s a Killing Field: IDF Soldiers Ordered to Shoot Deliberately at Unarmed Gazans Waiting for Humanitarian Aid.” He continued: “Then it pieced together half-truths, one-sided quotes, and convenient omissions to create a cartoon villain narrative of Israeli brutality, even when its sources contradicted that story.” 

Misrepresenting Hebrew sources for a foreign audience is a longstanding Haaretz specialty. The more spectacular the lie, the bigger the splash the nominally read Israeli newspaper makes in the international arena.

Recall the highly shocking and equally false 2012 headline, “Survey: Most Israeli Jews support apartheid regime in Israel,” later retracted. Then there was Haaretz‘s 2013 abysmal reporting, including truncated quotes, fueling false international coverage claiming Israel forcibly sterilized Ethiopian women. This fantastical story also crumbled under scrutiny and ended with a whimper in the form of a series of CAMERA-prompted corrections.

Special for English-speakers, Haaretz even routinely mistranslates its own Hebrew coverage. The tradition of introducing into the English edition false information defaming Israel, or erasing reporting on Palestinian or Arab belligerency or other wrongdoing which had appeared in the media outlet’s parallel Hebrew coverage, is so institutionalized and longstanding that CAMERA’s “Haaretz, Lost in Translation” seminal tracker has reached its bar mitzvah year.

Haaretz‘s “Killing Field” story is its coming-of-age “lost in translation” episode. Covering deadly shootings near the four Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF) aid distribution sites, Haaretz advances from tales of apartheid aspirations and sterilizations to Israel’s deliberate killing of hungry, harmless Palestinians lining up for food aid.

In their article, Nir Hasson, Yaniv Kubovich and Bar Peleg rely on numerous anonymous sources to allege that Israeli soldiers have received orders to fire on unarmed civilians who pose no threat to troops.

As of yesterday, the following example of muddled, intentionally misleading reporting and erroneous translation appeared on Haaretz‘s English-language site (screenshot at left June 29):

A senior officer whose name repeatedly comes up in testimonies about the shootings near aid sites is Brigadier General Yehuda Vach, commander of the IDF’s Division 252. Haaretz previously reported how Vach turned the Netzarim corridor into a deadly route, endangered soldiers on the ground, and was suspected of ordering the destruction of a hospital in Gaza without authorization.

The Hebrew version, in contrast, clearly states that the unit of Brig. General Yehuda Vach, about whom Haaretz previously reported as being responsible for the Netzarim corridor becoming a deadly route, does not operate in the area of GHF sites, three of which are located in southern part of the strip, and one of which is in central Gaza.

The Hebrew states (CAMERA’s translation): 

Vach’s division is not the unit which operates in the area. It is responsible for northern Gaza, and therefore Vach’s guidelines apply to looting of the U.N.’s aid truck and not the distribution centers.

Thus, according to the Hebrew edition, Vach doesn’t operate or have authority over the “killing field” in question. His relevance to the story is therefore tangential as opposed to evidential. Why, then, did Haaretz, in both languages, nevertheless misleadingly report that his “name repeatedly comes up in testimonies about the shootings near aid sites”? Why devote multiple paragraphs to the Brigadier General who is not part of the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation story, suggesting – despite the facts to the contrary – that the senior figure with a reportedly spotty record is somehow relevant to the GHF incidents? Worse, why does the English edition state the exact opposite as the Hebrew, falsely claiming that Vach, among others, does have responsibility for the GHF areas?

In response to communication from CAMERA, editors implemented a stealth change to the English edition, adding the following bolded text to the article:

Vach’s division is not the only one operating in the area. It’s responsible for northern Gaza, and therefore Vach’s policy is relevant to those who loot UN aid trucks, and not GHF sites. [Emphasis added.]

But mistranslation of the word “yechida” (יחידה) as “only” instead of (military) “unit,” still remains, maintaining an inherent contradiction in the English edition reporting: On the one hand, Vach operates in the area. On the other hand, he doesn’t.

Moreover, the headline of the English edition states as fact a disputed charge: “‘It’s a Killing Field’: IDF Soldiers Ordered to Shoot Deliberately at Unarmed Gazans Waiting for Humanitarian Aid.” The Hebrew headline, in contrast, qualifies the allegation, properly attributing it to its (anonymous) sources, as opposed to simply stating the disputed accusation as fact: “Combat soldiers testify: IDF is deliberately shooting towards Gazans next to aid centers.” (CAMERA’s translation.)

Haaretz has in the past corrected reporting which had falsely depicted disputed charges stated as fact, with no attribution. Though CAMERA has requested a correction of the headline which states as fact that soldiers were ordered to shoot deliberately at unarmed Gazans, editors have yet to set the record straight.

In addition, while anonymous sources are usually considered a last resort in journalism, the article is not only riddled with them, but the English edition went one step further, featuring an anonymous quote in the headline (“It’s a Killing Field”).

Furthermore, the Hebrew subheadline makes clear that the officers and soldiers alleged that they received orders to shoot towards (“לעבר”) Gazans (as opposed to “at,” as stated in the English) in order to disperse them (“כדי להרחיקם”). The subheadline in English makes no mention of the intention to disperse the crowds, reinforcing the disputed and shocking notion of a “killing field,” in which soldiers are blindly opening fire with the intention to kill. 

Finally, while the subheadline of the Hebrew edition clearly states that the army has rejected the allegations, the English edition cites only a denial from Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Minister of Defense Yisrael Katz, ignoring the army’s denial, which is the denial which carries more weight. Thus, the Hebrew subheadline rightly notes (CAMERA’s translation):

The IDF spokesman stated following the publication of the article: “There is no IDF directive whatsoever to deliberately shoot civilians.”

Regarding denials, the English subheadline states only: “Netanyahu, Katz reject claims, call them ‘blood libels.”

[saywhat-politics]

Israel's leaders slam a news report on a Gaza 'killing field' near food sites

Israel's prime minister denounced a report in Israeli newspaper Haaretz quoting Israeli soldiers saying commanders ordered them to fire at u

A newspaper report published in Hebrew and English quoting Israeli soldiers saying commanders have ordered them to shoot at unarmed hungry crowds of people in Gaza trying to reach food distribution sites prompted a scathing response by Israel's prime minister on Friday.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Israel Katz issued a joint statement calling the Haaretz report "blood libel."

"These are malicious falsehoods designed to defame the IDF [Israel Defense Forces], the most moral military in the world," they added.

Gaza's Health Ministry says more than 500 people have been killed and more than 4,000 wounded by Israeli forces while seeking food aid in the past month.

The Haaretz report quotes multiple anonymous Israeli soldiers describing what they say are the military's attacks on people trying to get food aid in Gaza since May 27. The soldiers say they were ordered by commanders to fire at unarmed civilians who were approaching food distribution sites during off hours, even when the crowds posed no threat.

[mossadspypigeon]

[i-am-aprl]

ISRAEL HAS BEEN DEFEATED - A TOTAL DEFEAT Haaretz, Israel’s longest running newspaper, published an article on April 11 titled. “Saying what can’t be said. Israel has been defeated - a total defeat,” by Chaim Levenson, an Israeli journalist for the last