She made particular reference to Reuters’ reporting on Israel’s killing of prominent Al-Jazeera journalist Anas Al-Sharif and six other media workers on August 10, saying the agency had “perpetuate[d] Israel’s propaganda”. She said it had been “wilfully abandoning the most basic responsibility of journalism” by publishing the “baseless claim” from the Israel Defence Forces (IDF) that Al-Sharif was an operative for Hamas.
An initial report published by Reuters received backlash after running with the headline: “Israel kills Al Jazeera journalist it says was Hamas leader”.
Zink said she could no longer wear her press pass without feeling “shame and grief”, as she shared an image of her press card snapped in half alongside her statement.
I just went back to some 2014 articles about Crimea and I’m not finding what you’re referencing, can you give me a hand?
It’s pretty much impossible to find an article where the journalist treats the Russian soldiers as unknown or neutral parties and almost just as hard to find articles that give the full statements from the Kremlin without the implication being that it’s not a proper explanatory statement given the situation. The reason is the statements filling the majority of the body are from western sources, which were more reputable in that instance.
To your point on covering Israel, it would be in the interest of telling the story accurately to mention that journalists are vetted through the IDF and all footage is subject to that vetting as well as who is allowed in. The factual model you present breaks down when access is limited, both by the IDF killing journalists and by limiting the eyes on the ground journalists, their equipment, their film, and their employees at every level. If you control the opposition’s ability to communicate reality, then you win under that model, but other news models like what Zeteo does mentions those things and the perspective is prioritized with the proper rarity and reputation that it actually has.
I didn’t know that about the vetting of journalists. You think there is access journalism at play in terms of the favorable treatment in articles or is it just plain old bias?
It’s both. You don’t bite the hand that feeds you as hard as it might deserve to be bitten. Selection bias is the main thing I see in news. They wouldn’t have that position long if they engaged in wrong-think or pointed the camera in the wrong class’ direction.