There are restrictions when operating in war zones so obviously journos have to abide by rules when participating since the military aren’t going to allow random journalists to give away their locations, hardware, or soldiers faces in their reporting. I’ve seen these programs in action throughout seven years in two war zones, and there is an extensive credentialing process that is undertaken to make sure the reporting doesn’t compromise operations. If journos don’t want to participate then that’s their choice, but most do because they know if they don’t, journos from other outlets will beat them to the story.I think the word you're searching for is filtering.
There's no way any army in the world would agree to journos independently reporting about what's going on a battlefield, for very, very understandable reasons. There's a feckton of things that can go wrong in a war. Always did, always do and alway will. Nobody wants it to come out and look like the bad guy. Vietnam and Desert Storm are two examples that taught us that much in modern warfare, and they're a few among many. Embedded journalists are basically people who renounced any kind of objective and neutral reporting in exchange of exclusivity, and they will inevitabily abide to an already predetermined narrative written by the army they chose to closely follow.
There are glimpses of truth but never the whole truth itself.
From my own perspective, you're a smart and very well educated person, I always read your posts because I know I'm about to learn something. However I'm quite astonished when it comes to your relentnessness in trying to downplay and justify anything that's been undertaken under the Israeli flag. I don't know if it's an attempt to bring balance in a discussion that has, let's be honest, been overtaken by a sometimes unabashed pro-palestinian side, or a genuine belief that the IDF is abiding by the rules and can do no wrong.
I might well be miles off the mark but that's my impression.
He’s such an irresponsible impotent moron. I don’t know if he’s genuinely stupid or just senile. The US are looking worse and worse day by day in this conflict, and it’s pretty much down to weak leadership embodied by this prat.Well, their propaganda minister is absolutely certain it's a Hamas HQ and we know that he never lies.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
One is driven by living under an apartheid regime, the other is driven by hate (well, it's more like some psychotic, divorced from reality existential fear). Israel is getting more stick because it's a nuclear superpower attempting to ethnically cleanse an indigenous population.Both sides are just as bad. Both are driven by hate, and both couldn't care less about the innocent in this conflict. I think Israel are getting more stick because of the hypocrisy surrounding them, which is mostly coming from their allies and our western organisations.
When you see this for what it is: Two terrorist groups fighting it out, it becomes easier to get past the anger and just feel sadness for the innocent involved on both sides.
You mean controlling the narrative? This was first introduced in Iraq. The unethical nature of it is the reason media houses now have to mention it.There are restrictions when operating in war zones so obviously journos have to abide by rules when participating since the military aren’t going to allow random journalists to give away their locations, hardware, or soldiers faces in their reporting. I’ve seen these programs in action throughout seven years in two war zones, and there is an extensive credentialing process that is undertaken to make sure the reporting doesn’t compromise operations. If journos don’t want to participate then that’s their choice, but most do because they know if they don’t, journos from other outlets will beat them to the story.
That's not what I meant. Journos can report what they want -- they just can't walk around outside of the protection of the military or broadcast locations, faces, etc. Things that would endanger the lives of those protecting them or the mission. Its a very basic requirement that everyone agrees to adhere to since using the military to report from within a war zone is a privilege not a right. Journos often add the caveat of something like "we were only allowed to film in certain areas and had to have our footage screened before broadcasting" as a heads up to audiences. Its a basic, common sense guideline that most journos are completely fine with given the alternative of not having any access to the battlefield.You mean controlling the narrative? This was first introduced in Iraq. The unethical nature of it is the reason media houses now have to mention it.
That Iraq war exposed a lot of ugly practices by govts.
Who would replace him ?Lapid has called on Netanyahu to resign immediately. Can’t imagine any Western leader who has offered Israel pretty much unconditional support lately would be sad to see it happen.
I know you didn’t mean what I said. I was referencing how “embedding” became a part of military operations and why. Its initial introduction had nothing to do with safety but control of narrative.That's not what I meant. Journos can report what they want -- they just can't walk around outside of the protection of the military or broadcast locations, faces, etc. Things that would endanger the lives of those protecting them or the mission. Its a very basic requirement that everyone agrees to adhere to since using the military to report from within a war zone is a privilege not a right. Journos often add the caveat of something like "we were only allowed to film in certain areas and had to have our footage screened before broadcasting" as a heads up to audiences. Its a basic, common sense guideline that most journos are completely fine with given the alternative of not having any access to the battlefield.
I see your point. There is no way to control what the journos say (this was the case in both Iraq and Afghanistan as well). They just couldn't report on locations and specific military details. I think the Israelis have taken it a bit further by making journos blur out faces as well.I know you didn’t mean what I said. I was referencing how “embedding” became a part of military operations and why. Its initial introduction had nothing to do with safety but control of narrative.
Any sensible govt will employ similar. I don’t like the principle, just can’t dispute warring factions are not obligated to any other but themselves.I see your point. There is no way to control what the journos say (this was the case in both Iraq and Afghanistan as well). They just couldn't report on locations and specific military details. I think the Israelis have taken it a bit further by making journos blur out faces as well.
According to Lapid it would have to be someone in Likud, until elections can be held after the war. So presumably there would need to be a Likud leadership contest. I don’t know who the likely candidates would be. In recent years Gideon Sa’ar has been the most oft-touted successor, but he’s no longer with Likud and his profile may have taken a hit after a previous failed bid to oust Netanyahu.Who would replace him ?
It doesn't matter. Netanyahu isn't going anywhere.According to Lapid it would have to be someone in Likud, until elections can be held after the war. So presumably there would need to be a Likud leadership contest. I don’t know who the likely candidates would be. In recent years Gideon Sa’ar has been the most oft-touted successor, but he’s no longer with Likud and his profile may have taken a hit after a previous failed bid to oust Netanyahu.
Stop using logic!So essentially Israel built a bunker underneath the hospital years ago, assumed that Hamas were using it as a command centre, bombed and shot a load of people, raided the hospital and found that Hamas were, in fact, not using it as a command centre?
It'll be more Israeli lies.Arab and Israeli posters, is this true?
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
I'm trying to understand who this person is. do you happen to know?Some comic relief
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
He was accused of embezzling money almost a decade ago. He also is not the leader of Hamas, he stepped down in 2017. He may be very rich and he may have embezzled money, but he's uninvolved now. The tweet is bullshit propagandaArab and Israeli posters, is this true?
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
genuinely can't believe they're still using that hashtag. at this point it's even more absurd than "it was necessary to destroy the town in order to save it"Arab and Israeli posters, is this true?
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Yeah like his other videos, very well and meticulously explained.I found this video interesting. I like this guys videos. He seems to do a lot of research on wars and geopolitics and they are well put together.
Watched 3 minutes. Turned it off. Absolute car crash.
Yeah, it's a bit of a mess.Watched 3 minutes. Turned it off. Absolute car crash.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Jesus Christ, how did Owen Jones keep his cool for that long, I would have lost my mind talking to those cnuts.Yeah, it's a bit of a mess.
This one is far more civilised and Owen Jones hits the nail on the head.
Wow.I found this video interesting. I like this guys videos. He seems to do a lot of research on wars and geopolitics and they are well put together.
These guys are definitely trying to minimise civilian casualties though, yes siree bob.This is another one worth a watch.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Given the IDF are one of the least competent military forces going, I'd back the hospital.IDF is waging war against hospitals. Who will prevail?
Indeed. Mosab has so much to say.Good interview between Cuomo and Mosab today.
