Asking you to back up your claim is “debatebro” now? Jesus fucking christ.
“Israel says ‘limited’ ground operations under way in Lebanon”
I don’t see the problem, it’s reporting what they said without any editorializing.
“finding the BBC had failed to respond adequately and within the 20 working days stipulated by law.”
They didn’t respond in a timely fashion to a records request. I’m not sure what that is supposed to prove.
“At least 153 dead after reported strike on school, Iran says.” vs “Nine dead in missile attack on Israel
as Iran strikes region”
I remember at the time that there was some confusion as to who attacked the school. Trump denied it, there was some talk that it was an Iranian missile that failed to launch, so I understand the caution in attributing the attack. For the second one, there was no problem with attribution.
Inb4 “those don’t prove anything”
Well, they don’t but you preempted me so I guess you win the internet today. Congratulations!
It seems we’ve reached an impasse. I’m not interested in doing a sources duel when you refuse to engage with anything else. The idea that media can be neatly characterized into “propaganda” and “not propaganda” is childish and absurd at face. This will be my final reply
You’re the one making the claim. Please provide credible sources that prove that they’re compromised.
It could be argued that you are the one making the claim. Why is the default assumption that the sources are trustworthy until proven otherwise?
Even if I accepted the burden of proof, what evidence of this would you accept?
Do you think you can read about it in your favored Western sources?
Just admit you can’t backup your claim.
Ok, if you insist on doing it the debatebro way
Here’s the first 3 BBC examples from https://lemmy.ml/c/ManufacturingConsent (all posted within the last week)
Inb4 “those don’t prove anything”
Yes, I asked you what evidence you would accept so will you answer that now?
Do you see now why that’s actually the interesting question?
Asking you to back up your claim is “debatebro” now? Jesus fucking christ.
I don’t see the problem, it’s reporting what they said without any editorializing.
They didn’t respond in a timely fashion to a records request. I’m not sure what that is supposed to prove.
I remember at the time that there was some confusion as to who attacked the school. Trump denied it, there was some talk that it was an Iranian missile that failed to launch, so I understand the caution in attributing the attack. For the second one, there was no problem with attribution.
Well, they don’t but you preempted me so I guess you win the internet today. Congratulations!
That’s a very interesting way to put “ignoring the interesting questions and coming back with the smug taunt”
Which is what you did again here.
Media control is a system that works across a whole society. I’m sure you believe that about China.
I ask again for the final time: What evidence of that pernicuous and pervasive system existing in the West would you accept?
I haven’t answered because it’s a dumb question. How about some evidence that’s convincing?
The examples you cited aren’t even close to convincing.
To recap, you made the edgelord claim that all news sources are propaganda. Back that up or quit wasting my time.
It seems we’ve reached an impasse. I’m not interested in doing a sources duel when you refuse to engage with anything else. The idea that media can be neatly characterized into “propaganda” and “not propaganda” is childish and absurd at face. This will be my final reply
Thank fuck for that.