I don’t see what is antisemitic about considering an Israeli publication (even a good one like Haaretz) to be subject to the same kind of inherent biases as a Qatari one. Israelis are not magically exempt from bias, to claim otherwise would be the kind of a prejudice that feeds antisemitism.
If you have objective data to show why Haaretz does not suffer from bias, please go ahead and point to them.
I believe you’re being earnest so I’m giving you the best information I have and doing my best to explain here.
For one thing Al Jazeera is literally owned by Quatar who funds and is allied with Hamas. The Hamas leadership all live there, as millionaires, under the protection of the state that owns the media outlet.
This is why their Media Bias Fact check is notably lower than Haaretz. Medium credibility vs. High credibility
Secondly, Haaretz is not owned by the Israeli government. Which not being state owned automatically gives it a credibility edge.
Personally, I do not like Haaretz, they are too soft on the conflict for me. But I don’t dispute the veracity of their journalism.
Al Jazeera though is just a state run propaganda machine for Qatar and Hamas.
EDIT and PS: For non Israeli/Hamas war, Al Jazeera isn’t as bad, for things they have no stake in its slightly better in it’s journalism. Same way you’d NEVER go to the BBC for info on the UK.
I don’t think you can get an objectively truly bias free news source nor bias checker. If you find one you agree with and people you trust agree with then that’s good for you. You can’t expect everyone else to conform to the same outlook as you. Regardless of which authority figures lauds it.
If Haaretz is ok, Al Jazeera is ok.
Haaretz is sus
Fine, then get rid of both
not even close
If you judge via your personal antisemitism, not based on data and objectivity.
I don’t see what is antisemitic about considering an Israeli publication (even a good one like Haaretz) to be subject to the same kind of inherent biases as a Qatari one. Israelis are not magically exempt from bias, to claim otherwise would be the kind of a prejudice that feeds antisemitism.
If you have objective data to show why Haaretz does not suffer from bias, please go ahead and point to them.
I believe you’re being earnest so I’m giving you the best information I have and doing my best to explain here.
For one thing Al Jazeera is literally owned by Quatar who funds and is allied with Hamas. The Hamas leadership all live there, as millionaires, under the protection of the state that owns the media outlet.
This is why their Media Bias Fact check is notably lower than Haaretz. Medium credibility vs. High credibility
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/al-jazeera/
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/haaretz/
Secondly, Haaretz is not owned by the Israeli government. Which not being state owned automatically gives it a credibility edge.
Personally, I do not like Haaretz, they are too soft on the conflict for me. But I don’t dispute the veracity of their journalism.
Al Jazeera though is just a state run propaganda machine for Qatar and Hamas.
EDIT and PS: For non Israeli/Hamas war, Al Jazeera isn’t as bad, for things they have no stake in its slightly better in it’s journalism. Same way you’d NEVER go to the BBC for info on the UK.
I don’t know anything about the raters’ objectivity but I asked for evidence and you did provide them. Touché.
What we need is a website that checks the bias of media-bias-fact-check-websites.
MBFC is a gold standard.
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/about/
Likely, you want a way to feed confirmation bias when the facts don’t support your narrative or view. For that, a bias or fact checker won’t help.
But if you really don’t like MBFC, then you could also check out All Sides and Ad Fontes Media.
I don’t think you can get an objectively truly bias free news source nor bias checker. If you find one you agree with and people you trust agree with then that’s good for you. You can’t expect everyone else to conform to the same outlook as you. Regardless of which authority figures lauds it.