- 104 Posts
- 230 Comments
21·5 months agoReuters – Bias and Credibility
Bias Rating: Least Biased
Factual Reporting: Very High
Country: United Kingdom
MBFC’s Country Freedom Rank: Mostly Free
Media Type: News Agency
Traffic/Popularity: High Traffic
MBFC Credibility Rating: High Credibility
MediaBiasFactCheck.com: About + Methodology
Ad Fontes Media Rating: Middle / Reliable
Writing by: Tom Perry
Editing by: Frances Kerry
Archive Link: 23 Jun 2024 03:30:27 UTC
Haha, I was wondering when someone was going to point that out. You’ll notice both MBFC and Ad Fontes were given that status primarily due to being Self-Published. However I wouldn’t consider MBFC or Ad Fontes to be the be-all and end-all perfectly authoritative source either.
You want to debate the specifics of an article from a source I find unreliable. I don’t want to. I wouldn’t want to if someone was posting something from Israel Hayom either.
The beauty of Wikipedia is they cite sources, keep edit history, and have a strong ethos of neutrality.
Smaller articles are more prone to being abused due to the sheer scale of Wikipedia, but are still subject to moderation if reported.
I don’t view Wikipedia articles as definitive, but generally I trust the community and don’t believe it has been overrun by right wing groups like NGO Monitor.
There is a consensus that NGO Monitor is not reliable for facts. Editors agree that, despite attempts to portray itself otherwise, it is an advocacy organization whose primary goal is to attack organizations that disagree with it or with the Israeli government regarding the Israeli–Palestinian conflict. Some editors also express concern about past attempts by NGO Monitor staff to manipulate coverage of itself on Wikipedia
I tend to side with Wikipedia in believing The Cradle unreliable in their news coverage, and wanted to pass it along.
They are are listed in the same category as the Anti Defamation League on the topic of Israel. Something that The Cradle chose to write about without disclosing their own status.
Reuters – Bias and Credibility
Bias Rating: Least Biased
Factual Reporting: Very High
Country: United Kingdom
MBFC’s Country Freedom Rank: Mostly Free
Media Type: News Agency
Traffic/Popularity: High Traffic
MBFC Credibility Rating: High Credibility
MediaBiasFactCheck.com: About + Methodology
Ad Fontes Media Rating: Middle / Reliable
Also By: Daria Sito-Sucic in Sarajevo, Stevo Vasiljevic in Podgorica and Fatos Bytyci in Pristina
Edited: Jason Neely and Andrew Heavens
Archive Link: 21 Jun 2024 20:44:44 UTC
Foreign Policy – Bias and Credibility
Bias Rating: Least Biased
Factual Reporting: High
Country: USA
Press Freedom Rank: Mostly Free
Media Type: Magazine
Traffic/popularity: High Traffic
MBFC Credibility Rating: High Credibility
Ad Fontes Media Rating: Middle / Reliable
Archive Link: 21 Jun 2024 21:41:42 UTC
For those who don’t know, The Cradle is banned by Wikipedia as an unreliable source.
The Cradle is an online magazine focusing on West Asia/Middle East-related topics. It was deprecated in the 2024 RfC due to a history of publishing conspiracy theories and wide referencing of other deprecated sources while doing so. Editors consider The Cradle to have a poor reputation for fact-checking.
If you read the WSJ article, it relies largely on interviews with Palestinians who were neighbors.
The author, Abeer Ayyoub, Is also a Palestinian from Gaza.
I’ll read the CNN article when I have a moment.
Edit: Had a moment and read the article. Best I can gather the CNN snippet you posted relies entirely on a Twitter/X post from the chairman of the Euro Med Monitor?
Wall Street Journal – Bias and Credibility
Bias Rating: Right-Center
Factual Reporting: Mostly Factual
Country: USA
Press Freedom Rating: Mostly Free
Media Type: Newspaper
Traffic/Popularity: High Traffic
MBFC Credibility Rating: High Credibility
MediaBiasFactCheck.com: About + Methodology
Ad Fontes Media Rating: Middle / Reliable
Article By: Abeer Ayyoub
Archive Link: 17 Jun 2024 14:28:50 UTC
Link to Abdallah Aljamal‘s Facebook page, as mentioned in the article.
So basically it’s what I said? Israel did not give money to Hamas, but did allow money to flow from the Qatari government to them.
The result may have been the same, but I think it’s fair to say Israel didn’t fund Hamas right?
Source on Israel funding Hamas?
My understanding is they allowed money to pass from Qatar to Hamas, but never directly funded them.
Care to offer a source you find unbiased?
nothing buy western media
TIL Reuters (United Kingdom), the Associated Press (United States), and Deutsche Welle (Germany) aren’t western media.
The person I replied to wrote:
However we do not get these kind of accounts for the tens of thousands of Palestinians murdered by Israel.
I have listened to, read, and seen dozens if not hundreds of Palestinian stories going into great detail about their lives and suffering. The narrative that the media, and in particular Reuters, doesn’t cover Palestinian stories because they are unworthy victims is patently false. These articles are quick examples of this and I posted them to challenge the perception of some users on Lemmy (Lemmings?).
Reuters is not propaganda, that is abundantly clear.
A news article from less than a week ago?
The first sentence being:
Hamas rejected the US-backed proposal to end the conflict in Gaza, saying Israel must commit to a permanent cease-fire and full withdrawal…
Seems “Zionists” aren’t the only obstacles to peace and the release of hostages.
Got a source to go along with that claim?
deleted by creator
Not exactly?
Archive Link: 23 Jun 2024 14:56:24 UTC
By: Guy Faulconbridge, Filipp Lebedev
About: Reuters
Country: United Kingdom
Media Type: News Agency
Traffic/Popularity: High Traffic
MBFC Rating: Least Biased / Very High / High
Ad Fontes Media Rating: Middle / Reliable
Wikipedia Rating: Generally Reliable