International food charity World Central Kitchen (WCK) is suspending its operations in Gaza following the death of seven of its workers in an Israeli air strike.
One very important word missing from that headline. The BBC should be ashamed of its coverage as they do this again and again.
Corrected version: “World Central Kitchen halts operations in Gaza after ISRAELI strike kills staff”
deleted by creator
Except when the perpetrator is light skinned - then they are more careful with throwing that word around.
Maybe I’m above average here, but i feel like that’s already pretty obvious. AFAIK Israel is the only one currently genociding in Gaza. Now, if it WASNT Israel, that’d need the extra word.
You only get so many words in a title, news orgs tend to leave out the ones that don’t need more explanation.
it isn’t obvious to anyone reading mainstream news. news orgs are bending over backwards to obfuscate who’s actually doing the killing (one particularly egregious example being the NYT writing a whole-ass haiku instead of stating that Israeli soldiers opened fire on Palestinians seeking aid). sure, this particular headline would be ok if it was common knowledge that Israel is causing the wanton destruction in Gaza, but thanks to every other headline being like this, it isn’t
ABC News in Australia has been using the passive voice everywhere in regards to Israel until they simply couldn’t avoid it any longer now that Israel has killed an Australian aid worker.
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/3/26/australias-abc-staffs-concerns-over-gaza-bias-revealed#:~:text=Staff at Australia’s national broadcaster,claims that convulsed the outlet. ABC staff have been complaining internally about pro-Israel bias in their use of language too
Maybe we need an “honest news article” by Juice Media on YouTube 😂
Wow, you really weren’t kidding about the haiku. Wtf.
There have been a couple of recent (post-October) studies into BBC coverage, the issue I raise concerning the language used in the title is consistent with its use of language elsewhere. For example, Israelis are “killed” and Palestinians “die”.
"About 700 people have been killed in Israel since Hamas launched its attack on Saturday, with a further 500 having died in Gaza in retaliatory air strikes." "Some 1200 people have been killed in Israel, while more than 1000 have died in retaliatory air strikes on Gaza." "More than 700 people have been killed in Israel since Saturday and over 500 people have died in Gaza."[…] the openDemocracy analysis found that the phrases “murder”, “murderous”, “mass murder”, “brutal murder” and “merciless murder” were used a total of 52 times by [BBC] journalists to refer to Israeli deaths – but never in relation to Palestinian deaths.
When I read this sort of coverage on a daily basis, I see these patterns repeated again and again, it’s a subtle reframing that many don’t notice but editors (and headline writers) at the BBC will be very aware of how they are using language. Space is not an excuse to remove the perpetrator from the picture regardless of how obvious that perpetrator might be, it is disingenuous.
Study shows BBC ‘bias’ in reporting on Palestinian and Israeli deaths - The National
I’ve seen articles that said 1,200 Israelis killed by Hamas and then the next sentence said 32,000 Palestinians killed…but didn’t say by Israel.
The juxtaposition of those two sentences may lead some people to think that Hamas killed those tens of thousands.
I agree with you regarding headlines, but the article text itself should make it very clear that the vast majority of civilians killed in this conflict were killed by the Israeli Occupation Forces.
WCK said it had co-ordinated the convoy’s movements with the IDF when it was hit.
WTF?! How could this happen? Is IDF that incompetent and must hit anything that moves?
The answer is in the headline. WCK is halting its operations. IDF Mission: Accomplished.
The armored trucks were also clearly labeled with the charities logos.
This means the trucks were bombed intentionally, they were bombed when clearly identified as aid workers, or they were bombed indiscriminately.
None of the above is good for the IDF.
Most likely they will claim the “fog of war” was the issue and there will be non specific “changes” that they will make after a long delay, all while blaming aid organizations for not providing volunteers to stop the genocidal starvation they are causing.
deleted by creator
Nah this is the outcome they were looking for. Mission accomplished.
I took it to mean the IDF hit the convoy intentionally, knowing all its movements and such from the coordination.
It was intentional. WCK coordinated with the IDF on the route plan.
the IDF hit the convoy three times with precision guided munitions over the span a couple of kilometers.
the claim was that they had seen someone who was alleged to be an armed terrorist enter the building hours before the convoy departed from it.
How dare you feed the children that look similar to a drawing that could be a terrorist
Israel gotta make sure to “accidentally” kill food aid workers so its “accidental” famine “accidentally” drives Gazans to desperation and death.
Oh, but they have the right to self defense.
You know, they rape the women in the neighboring country out of self defense.
They bomb hospitals in the next country over out of self defense.
They starve the population of the neighboring country out of self defense.
/s
Not ‘air strike’.
BOMBING
Alternatively: murder
They both sound equally terrible.
deleted by creator
We need to start using U.S. troops to make these food deliveries. These types of “mistakes” would stop immediately.
deleted by creator
This shitty website doesn’t load. Can OP please paste thr article here?
