Them being "Qatari Propaganda" and them having good coverage of Palestine can both be true. This is negative for the Palestinian cause, as Al Jazeera was the largest official news source that wasn't western propaganda. This move was done purely to suppress negative news on Israel, and not because of their affiliation to Qatar. No offense to you, but saying Al Jazeera deserved to be booted seems like a take straight out of Reddit
I understand what you're getting at, but I've read their reporting on Palestine for the last 10 years or so, and I agree that they are, out of the bigger news outlets, better than most when it comes to reporting on Palestine. They have good journalists working for them, and have had good reporters over the years. But more and more lately they are almost irredeemable because of how they abuse the goodwill they built up by reporting this one issue in order to manufacture consent among Arabs, Muslims, pro Palestinians alike against Iran, Syria and other actual resistance forces in the region. Believe me, I don't dismiss sources as propaganda lightly, but in this case it is very bloody blatant. The only reason they are willing to report honestly about Palestine occasionally is because they get to funnel that readership towards rooting for literal ISIS for their own gain. The sheer bullshit they spun about Syria is part of the reason so many Arabs and Muslims around the world celebrated the end of the SAR.
What does it matter if they report accurately on occasion, if at the end of the day, they end up steering so many well meaning people to cheer on the same side as fucking Netanyahu. Sure they tell the truth occasionally, but they are not honest actors, and absolutely deserve to be booted, if it's journalism you're after it's better to get it from independent voices and not those that at the end of the day have interests that align with Zionism. There is little that functionally sets them apart from NYC, Guardian, BBC, when all of them are running cover to help their governments build pipelines no matter the cost.
You're not wrong about AJ but the PA are even worse. They are not doing this because AJ helps disseminate propaganda against anti-imperialist forces in the Middle East, they're doing it because they're Kapos, they're the running dogs of the Zionists and even the token amount of good reporting on Palestine that AJ does in order to gain credibility in the Arab world is too much truth, and that poses a threat to the Zionists. On the one hand that is a sign of the extreme weakness and fragility of the Zionist regime, however it is not something that we need to be celebrating as it does shut off one of the few remaining sources of somewhat decent reporting on Gaza in occupied Palestine.
You're right about the PA. They're a puppet government of the Israeli's for decades by now, and their reasoning for kicking out AJ are probably not coming from a good place. But if they kicked out the AP, TRT or any similar outlet it would elicit the same response. At the end of the day they are not trustworthy, not anymore. How you can still think this after they lied about Gaddaffi, lied about the Syrian opposition, and in the midst of a genocide where they were able to so clearly report about Israel's crimes, CHOSE to lie again about Syria and divert their readership to further their agenda, shows genuine malice as they of all people should literally know better at a time like this. It's not ignorance but deliberate ethical malpractice.
I don't care for the PA, but I have come to despise Al-Jazeera in particular. You expect this sort of bullshit from western outlets because they've always lied about everything in this region, when Al Jazeera had broadly told the truth, it turns out they've not changed at all either. It's bleak, I know that, but I cannot have any sympathy for these liars, I just hope that someone with better intentions can take their place.
There is little that functionally sets them apart from NYC, Guardian, BBC,
That is very much an unfair comparison to make. If there were more mainstream news outlets with a pro-palestine slant, then the comparison would hold. But a few independent voices with a small reach will not be able to fill Al jazeera's reach.
No offense but independent media has way bigger reach than mainstream outlets like AJ, NYT and the like. Twitter, Tiktok and Telegram are the primary news source for a lot of people, particularly in out here in the developing world. It's inaccurate to assume that big outlets have some sort of monopoly on readership, when this just isn't the case anymore. Maybe ten years ago they may have had a unique role compared to the rest, but today they mainly compete alongside independent news on these same platforms, and are doing more harm than good and have outlived their purpose. Maybe they're not comparable to NYT and the guardian, but a better comparison would be TRT world, it's still imperialist state broadcasting that is using Palestinian suffering as a way to stir up religious divides to further a political agenda that doesn't give a shit about Palestine at all. The end result of their efforts over the course of this 14 month genocidal campaign is to weaken the Palestinian cause on the ground, and funnel well meaning people into dangerous and counterproductive ideologies.
Cannot perform investigative journalism, so they rely on the mainstream news outlets to gather info in the first place. If social media sites act as retailers, then mainstream outlets are the factories.
There are actual primary sources that propagate through telegram because anywhere else they are likely to be censored or banned, particularly in regards to Palestine, and also in the Ukraine. I recommend looking into the ecosystem of how this sort of news gets around, as it's how a lot of the firsthand accounts and atrocities from people are made visible, without the corporate middleman that usually spins it.
Them being "Qatari Propaganda" and them having good coverage of Palestine can both be true. This is negative for the Palestinian cause, as Al Jazeera was the largest official news source that wasn't western propaganda. This move was done purely to suppress negative news on Israel, and not because of their affiliation to Qatar. No offense to you, but saying Al Jazeera deserved to be booted seems like a take straight out of Reddit
I understand what you're getting at, but I've read their reporting on Palestine for the last 10 years or so, and I agree that they are, out of the bigger news outlets, better than most when it comes to reporting on Palestine. They have good journalists working for them, and have had good reporters over the years. But more and more lately they are almost irredeemable because of how they abuse the goodwill they built up by reporting this one issue in order to manufacture consent among Arabs, Muslims, pro Palestinians alike against Iran, Syria and other actual resistance forces in the region. Believe me, I don't dismiss sources as propaganda lightly, but in this case it is very bloody blatant. The only reason they are willing to report honestly about Palestine occasionally is because they get to funnel that readership towards rooting for literal ISIS for their own gain. The sheer bullshit they spun about Syria is part of the reason so many Arabs and Muslims around the world celebrated the end of the SAR.
What does it matter if they report accurately on occasion, if at the end of the day, they end up steering so many well meaning people to cheer on the same side as fucking Netanyahu. Sure they tell the truth occasionally, but they are not honest actors, and absolutely deserve to be booted, if it's journalism you're after it's better to get it from independent voices and not those that at the end of the day have interests that align with Zionism. There is little that functionally sets them apart from NYC, Guardian, BBC, when all of them are running cover to help their governments build pipelines no matter the cost.
You're not wrong about AJ but the PA are even worse. They are not doing this because AJ helps disseminate propaganda against anti-imperialist forces in the Middle East, they're doing it because they're Kapos, they're the running dogs of the Zionists and even the token amount of good reporting on Palestine that AJ does in order to gain credibility in the Arab world is too much truth, and that poses a threat to the Zionists. On the one hand that is a sign of the extreme weakness and fragility of the Zionist regime, however it is not something that we need to be celebrating as it does shut off one of the few remaining sources of somewhat decent reporting on Gaza in occupied Palestine.
You're right about the PA. They're a puppet government of the Israeli's for decades by now, and their reasoning for kicking out AJ are probably not coming from a good place. But if they kicked out the AP, TRT or any similar outlet it would elicit the same response. At the end of the day they are not trustworthy, not anymore. How you can still think this after they lied about Gaddaffi, lied about the Syrian opposition, and in the midst of a genocide where they were able to so clearly report about Israel's crimes, CHOSE to lie again about Syria and divert their readership to further their agenda, shows genuine malice as they of all people should literally know better at a time like this. It's not ignorance but deliberate ethical malpractice.
I don't care for the PA, but I have come to despise Al-Jazeera in particular. You expect this sort of bullshit from western outlets because they've always lied about everything in this region, when Al Jazeera had broadly told the truth, it turns out they've not changed at all either. It's bleak, I know that, but I cannot have any sympathy for these liars, I just hope that someone with better intentions can take their place.
That is very much an unfair comparison to make. If there were more mainstream news outlets with a pro-palestine slant, then the comparison would hold. But a few independent voices with a small reach will not be able to fill Al jazeera's reach.
No offense but independent media has way bigger reach than mainstream outlets like AJ, NYT and the like. Twitter, Tiktok and Telegram are the primary news source for a lot of people, particularly in out here in the developing world. It's inaccurate to assume that big outlets have some sort of monopoly on readership, when this just isn't the case anymore. Maybe ten years ago they may have had a unique role compared to the rest, but today they mainly compete alongside independent news on these same platforms, and are doing more harm than good and have outlived their purpose. Maybe they're not comparable to NYT and the guardian, but a better comparison would be TRT world, it's still imperialist state broadcasting that is using Palestinian suffering as a way to stir up religious divides to further a political agenda that doesn't give a shit about Palestine at all. The end result of their efforts over the course of this 14 month genocidal campaign is to weaken the Palestinian cause on the ground, and funnel well meaning people into dangerous and counterproductive ideologies.
Cannot perform investigative journalism, so they rely on the mainstream news outlets to gather info in the first place. If social media sites act as retailers, then mainstream outlets are the factories.
There are actual primary sources that propagate through telegram because anywhere else they are likely to be censored or banned, particularly in regards to Palestine, and also in the Ukraine. I recommend looking into the ecosystem of how this sort of news gets around, as it's how a lot of the firsthand accounts and atrocities from people are made visible, without the corporate middleman that usually spins it.