Comment on ABC pulls interview with Palestine advocate from website and iview
sqgl@beehaw.org 1 week agoAnd since they went through the bother of “accidentally” uploading it, why did they go through the extra bother to remove it?
They play both sides. Am sure they have their own internal battles of which side to support since they do not seem consistent to me.
Zagorath@aussie.zone 1 week ago
From what I can tell, the average ABC worker is on the right side of this. But ABC management seems to have a direct line to the genocide supporters. And when the Israel lobbyists tell Kim Williams (or formerly Ita Buttrose) to jump, he (she) asks “how high?” We only need look at the Lattouf case or, less sensationally, Sandy Gutman, to see that.
That’s why what repeatedly happens is the right thing happens at first. Then management gets wind of it, usually because of DMs from lobbyists, and orders a reversal.
In this case, I think what probably happened is it got uploaded as normal. Because that’s what they do. Any vaguely interesting segment of television gets uploaded to their website and iView. Then the Israel lobby saw it, saw that he was calling out their genocide, and got on the like to Williams or Hugh Marks or someone else on the board or management, and they sent down the instruction to nix it.
Ilandar@lemm.ee 1 week ago
Didn’t Media Watch report on this exact phenomenon earlier this year?
Zagorath@aussie.zone 1 week ago
Maybe. I couldn’t find the report if it did, but that’s not a huge surprise given how hard this is to google for.
I’d be extra interested if it happened under the current Media Watch host, who has ties to zionist organisations (he studied at Moriah College, a member of the zionist “Jewish Communal Appeal”), and started on Media Watch in February or March this year.
Ilandar@lemm.ee 1 week ago
It was under Besser, in just his second episode. They investigated the way ABC management handled criticism over Antoinette Lattouf’s social media comments, which I guess you’re already familiar with given you referenced this previously.
sqgl@beehaw.org 1 week ago
The average worker is Left wing and therefore agrees with your and Hamas’ position. I am left but often disagree with them on the Gaza issues. In fact their dodgy reporting on Al Ahli hospital early lost them their credibility.
I have not seen any news organisation consistently report “fairly”. The only examplenof even handedness was a pair of entries from a blogger a couple.of months in (probably still valid - let me know if it has dated)…
…medium.com/israel-has-lost-the-war-d7b9b3934f73
…medium.com/hamas-has-lost-the-war-5bea9813fcf3
Zagorath@aussie.zone 1 week ago
I think it’s very important to start from the place of acknowledging that nothing Hamas does or has done is relevant. Whether someone condemns Hamas or wholeheartedly supports them, or (as most people probably do) sit somewhere in between, really doesn’t matter. Because genocide is absolutely, totally, inexcusable. Even if Hamas were committing genocide themselves, that does not excuse Israel’s genocide. And the fact is that Hamas isn’t committing genocide. They literally could not if they wanted to. They haven’t the power necessary for it.
Any organisation that is censoring people who accuse Israel of genocide, or who play whataboutism games by trying to ensure that condemnations of Israel are always followed by condemnations of Hamas, are abetting genocide.
This meme summarises it nicely.
A cartoon of a cat saying “It’s impossible to starve children to death in self defense”
sqgl@beehaw.org 1 week ago
That meme ignores Hamas hijacking aid.
Hamas could just surrender.
BrainInABox@lemmy.ml 1 week ago
You can’t be “left” when you’re pro-genocide
sqgl@beehaw.org 1 week ago
They aren’t very efficient with “genocide” are they? Bad shots you reckon?
It is a terrible war without resorting to hyperbole. I understand it is for PR but surely we can be better than that on Lemmy?