Comment on MBFC Credibility - High

• Aceticon@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  You’re claiming I said something I never said.

  The manipulation and narrative control is in:

  • Portraying one side as having justification for their acts and the other as acting without reason.
  • Systematically quoting without confirmation the justifications given by one side, not the other.

  The Propaganda technique called “framing” is, quite self-explanatorily, framing (a.k.a. decorating) what is being reported about one side’s actions in one way and what is being reported about the other side differently - the core content which are the events are described the same but only one side’s views on the why for those event.

  IOt’s a far more subtle technique than outright telling the readers “these are the good guys” or using nicer words for the same actions if executed by one side than used for the kind of action when executed by the other side (mind you, at least 3 of these 4 examples will also use this latter technique, which is about “portraying” rather than “framing”)

  My contribution frames both sides equally thus both actors seem equally rational in their actions and the justifications of given by both are there with equal prominence. It gives both sides’ justifications to the readers and leaves it to the readers to decide who to believe and which justifications they found valid. That’s how actual Journalism aims to report: giving what they have to the readers and leaving it up to the readers to decide who to believe.

  Framing is not a technique from Journalism.

  source

  • nonailsleft@lemm.ee ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    The reason the Israeli airstrikes were cited as pre-emptive is that that adds important information, as in they were aimed at the sites that were about to launch the rockets

    Adding that the rocket attack was called retaliatory does not nearly add the same level of information, as everyone already knows what the strike was for and, at the very least, that nearly every strike in this conflict would be called ‘retaliatory’. Again, you’re pleading for stupid news for stupid people.

    Should they have added that it was Hezbollah that restarted this bloody back and forth in each and every title as well?

    source

    • Aceticon@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      Saying that what they were trying to prevent was a retaliatory attack also adds important information.

      In all you comments here you have consistently displayed the underlying logic in your attempts at “arguments” that your side getting its viewpoint and arguments aired should happen whilst the other side getting its viewpoints and arguments aired has all manner of vaguelly defined problems like the “title gets too long” or “imagine if we did this all the way to infinity”, which are “problems” that also apply to your side’s viewpoints (literally dropping “premptive” would make the title shorter and most of those titles are actually unusually long).

      You literally apply two different standards for the same kind of information depending on which side it’s helpful for. You might as well just come out and say “I’m with Israel no matter what and I’ll always make excuses up for stopping the enemies of Israel being portrayed as human”.

      I see no point in continuing to engage with such a dishonest tribalist since such people are not rational, and in this specific case the side you chose is child mass murderers, which is the most abhorrent faction imaginable for a human being to side with.

      source

      • nonailsleft@lemm.ee ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

        ‘My side’?

        This is a religious conflict in which both sides are wrong and evil.

        Reading your posts I think it’s pretty clear that it’s you that’s picked a side here that you want to defend. You want to defend it so badly you can’t look at a normal title of a news article anymore without getting angry that it’s not spinned how you’d want it.

        source