intelshill

joined 2 years ago
[–] intelshill@lemmy.ca 18 points 1 year ago (6 children)

Oh look it's the consequences of my actions

[–] intelshill@lemmy.ca 0 points 1 year ago

Call me when Zen 5 launches. Zen 3 is one generation behind AMD's current flagship.

[–] intelshill@lemmy.ca 8 points 1 year ago

Please recall that Patten was the same person who went from:

Russian soldiers are supplied with Viagra to rape Ukrainian women and 'dehumanize' them, claims UN official

Russia using rape as 'military strategy' in Ukraine: UN envoy

to

No solid evidence of rape accusations against Russia, admits UN official

Patten has a history of misrepresenting reality to spread a political agenda. With that context in mind, I'll be taking a closer look at the "evidence" Patten uses to make her claims. Are her sources reliable? Are her sources unbiased? Is there forensic data?

[–] intelshill@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yeah, that's probably fair. The scale of the US intervention may have been different, though.

[–] intelshill@lemmy.ca 11 points 1 year ago (3 children)

You think the NYT played no role in drumming up public support for an otherwise incredibly unpopular foreign policy decision? Here's a report by FAIR: https://fair.org/home/20-years-later-nyt-still-cant-face-its-iraq-war-shame/

[–] intelshill@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 year ago (6 children)

These mistakes led to the deaths of hundreds of thousands. How much more genocide apologism do you want to do?

[–] intelshill@lemmy.ca 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Surely, then, your fact checkers will mention the NYT's failure of reporting on Iraq's WMDs in their fact checks?

Oh. They don't? I wonder why.

[–] intelshill@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

You're saying... A member of BRICS is an unreliable source of news for news about BRICS membership?

Edit: That Venezuela and Iran, two nations who are undoubtedly friendly with each other, make inaccurate statements about what each others' leaders are saying? This is Iran reporting on a statement by Maduro about joining BRICS. That is the news.

[–] intelshill@lemmy.ca 9 points 1 year ago (4 children)

"oh no! hackers learned how to hack in... public universities! The horror of PRC-sponsored hacking!"

[–] intelshill@lemmy.ca 10 points 1 year ago

I agree on this. For better or for worse, the NYT is representative of US news media to the world.

[–] intelshill@lemmy.ca 9 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Most fact checkers don't know shit. Fact is, these two stories have been used to justify conflicts where hundreds of thousands of people have died.

[–] intelshill@lemmy.ca 7 points 1 year ago (8 children)

These are some of the most important and impactful stories since 2000. If the NYT can't keep their journalism robust for these, what does it say about everything else?

Oh wait, we already know: "Palestinian family collides with bullet discharged from Israeli weapon"

 

The New York Times is one of the newspapers of record for the United States. However, it's history of running stories with poor sourcing, insufficient evidence, and finding journalists with conflicts of interest undermines it's credibility when reporting on international issues and matters of foreign policy.

Late last year, the NYT ran a story titled 'Screams Without Words': How Hamas Weaponized Sexual Violence on Oct. 7. Recently, outlets like The Intercept, Jacobin, Democracy Now! , Mondoweiss, and others have revealed the implicit and explicit bias against Palestine that's apparent both in the aforementioned NYT story and in the NYT's reporting at large. By obfuscating poor sources, running stories without evidence, and using an ex-IDF officer with no journalism experience as the author, the NYT demonstrates their disregard for common journalistic practice. This has led to inaccurate and demonstrably false reporting on critical issues in today's world, which has been used to justify the lack of American pressure against Israel to the American public.

This journalistic malpractice is not unusual from the NYT. One of the keystone stories since the turn of the century was the NYT's reporting on Iraq's pursuit of WMDs: U.S. SAYS HUSSEIN INTENSIFIES QUEST FOR A-BOMB PARTS, Defectors Bolster U.S. Case Against Iraq, Officials Say, Illicit Arms Kept Till Eve of War, An Iraqi Scientist Is Said to Assert. These reports were later revealed to be false, and the NYT later apologized, but not before the reporting was used as justification to launch the War on Iraq, directly leading to the deaths of hundreds of thousands and indirectly causing millions of death while also destabilizing the region for decades.

These landmark stories have had a massive influence on US foreign policy, but they're founded on lies. While stories published in the NYT do accurately reflect foreign policy aims of the US government, they are not founded in fact. The NYT uses lies to drum up public support for otherwise unpopular foreign policy decisions. In most places, we call that "government propaganda."

I think reading and understanding propaganda is an important element of media literacy, and so I'm not calling for the ban of NYT articles in this community. However, I am calling for an honest discussion on media literacy and it's relation to the New York Times.

view more: ‹ prev next ›