Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Display:
Quoting a very long article in its entirety without comment, with all of it above fold, and an article that is official propaganda to boot, could be considered spamming, but whatever.

I moved the main stuff below the fold, and changed page-blowing written-out links into embedded links.

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.

by DoDo on Thu Aug 3rd, 2006 at 11:02:44 AM EST
[ Parent ]
With all due respect, almost every article posted in the news summary for each day has been an editorial critisizing Israel in some form. If that isn't propaganda, I don't know what is. Even if we set aside the fact that op-eds are not news, I fail to see the difference. True, the phone numbers, and other information may be a bit excessive and unnecessary, but it is no more propaganda than anything else I have read thus far on EuroTrib regarding the conflict.

Mikhail from SF
by Tsarrio (dj_tsar@yahoo.com) on Thu Aug 3rd, 2006 at 07:29:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Criticising Israel is propaganda?...

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.
by DoDo on Fri Aug 4th, 2006 at 12:15:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Of course: Israel is perfect. Didn't you get the memo?
by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Fri Aug 4th, 2006 at 12:16:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I think you misunderstood what I was saying. You were critisizing messy for posting a bunch of pro-Israeli material because some of it is clearly propaganda. Likewise, posting an editorial or a comment from an anti-Israeli source is ALSO propaganda. I am critisizing the lack of diversity of opinions on this site.

Mikhail from SF
by Tsarrio (dj_tsar@yahoo.com) on Fri Aug 4th, 2006 at 12:52:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]
No, I criticised him for quoting a long Israeli government propaganda article (consisting in large part of quotes from articles) in its entirety, and without comment, and all of it above fold, which in other places is considered spamming.

I am critisizing the lack of diversity of opinions on this site.

  1. Given that from messy through you, Marek and a couple of others, there is a continuum of opinions on Israel on this side of 'just critical', there is a diversity of opinions.

  2. If opinions tend to be in one direction, that can not only be due to lack of objectivity. It could be due to making the right conclusion.


*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.
by DoDo on Fri Aug 4th, 2006 at 04:50:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]
75% of Americans supported the war in Iraq. Is it because there was a lack of objectivity or because they made the right conclusion? :)

Mikhail from SF
by Tsarrio (dj_tsar@yahoo.com) on Fri Aug 4th, 2006 at 07:28:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]
99% of ET readers were against the Iraq War. Is this because of lack of objectivity, or because this is a sample of people more informed and/or of better judgement than Americans asked by pollsters?

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.
by DoDo on Sat Aug 5th, 2006 at 07:15:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I can understand why they did. It was the right conclusion to make given the circumstances.

Nothing is 'mere'. — Richard P. Feynman
by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Sat Aug 5th, 2006 at 07:30:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Are you saying ET is not neutral or that it is propaganda?

Nothing is 'mere'. — Richard P. Feynman
by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Fri Aug 4th, 2006 at 12:17:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I am saying that ET is by far not neutral. And the propaganda is the fact that every bit of news that is being posted so far is either from Lebanon, or an editorial by someone supporting Hizbollah or opposing Israel. I maybe failed to see an article about 8 Israelis dying yesterday, and about 150 rockets launchd by Hizbollah, or about the fact that the Qana death toll was overstated, or maybe they weren't posted by anyone because we don't like nuance on this site?

Mikhail from SF
by Tsarrio (dj_tsar@yahoo.com) on Fri Aug 4th, 2006 at 12:50:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]
And the propaganda is the fact that every bit of news that is being posted so far is either from Lebanon, or an editorial by someone supporting Hizbollah or opposing Israel.

Bullshit. I often source news about israeli crimes from Haaretz because the facts speak for themselves and I want to avoid exactly this kind of accusation.

Nothing is 'mere'. — Richard P. Feynman

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Fri Aug 4th, 2006 at 12:54:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]
by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Fri Aug 4th, 2006 at 01:01:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]
All I ask is that when news and current events are being discussed, we separate real news from made up news. An article by Juan Cole, as respected as he may be, is not real news. It's rehashing of old news through the prism of one person. Similarly, re-posting articles from other blogs are propaganda even though they are not government-sponsored propaganda, because they seek to push one point only. Dictionary.com defines propaganda as "The systematic propagation of a doctrine or cause or of information reflecting the views and interests of those advocating such a doctrine or cause." I say if you took the past 2 weeks worth of news reports and articles compiled from ET, the distribution wouldn't just be uneven, it would be extreme.

Again, I am not advocating that just because there's an Israeli side, it must be represented in the same exact proportion, I am merely stating that before we go on accusing someone of posting something unnecessary we look at our own actions.

Just for the record, I do not support Israel's current actions, although I do support its right to defend itself to SOME EXTENT.


Mikhail from SF

by Tsarrio (dj_tsar@yahoo.com) on Fri Aug 4th, 2006 at 07:34:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Messy could at the very least given the source for this. Is it an e-mail he got? Where is it coming from? Everything else we quote here is linked to its source, so people can go and check for themselves.

I totally agree that opinion should be a separate section of the breakfast, I proposed this months ago, but it didn't stick. But I don't see you making this point on the Breakfast thread, or contributing other news and opinion to the Breakfast and Evening Open Thread either.

So ok, a sampling of ET's content will give that impression. That doesn't make it propaganda: it's an editorial line. But ET has dissenting voices.

I'm going to say the same to the "ET is anti-Israel" crowd that I said to the "ET is anti-American", "ET is anti-Russian" or "ET is anti-British" crowds. Enlighten us, source news and opinion, write diaries. Don't complain that the content you would write is not written by others.

Nothing is 'mere'. — Richard P. Feynman

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Sat Aug 5th, 2006 at 04:43:30 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Good suggestion (the opinion section).
For the rest, I would say that the only thing "anti-" that ET is, is "anti-ET".
ET has a lot of infighting. On whales, on Russia, on nuclear energy, on the EU Constitutional Treaty, on Israel ... although I would agree with Tsarrio that most of us here and not impressed with Israel's current stance in Lebanon, and it's quite rare for so many of us to seem to agree on that. Maybe we should indeed condemn Hezbollah's ugly moves more, to balance it out.
by Alex in Toulouse on Sat Aug 5th, 2006 at 04:47:27 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Here's an interesting thought that won't have occurred to you. My despair at this situation is that Israel is doing this stupid shit that will make Israel's position worse. Above and beyond the stupid loss of innocent life on both sides - and I really am going to get pissed off at the normal "condemn the terrorists more" bullshit - this invasion and the behaviour of the Israeli state has made it less and less likely that any of the conflicts in the area will be resolved. I expect the "western democracy" in the area to act as the grown-ups not as children throwing a tantrum.

Almost everyone on this site is pro-Israeli and pro-American. Oh, and pro-Lebanon and pro-Iran. It's the leaders of those countries that seem to be on the other side.

by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Fri Aug 4th, 2006 at 12:55:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Nobody says anything about condemning the terrorists more. I appreciate your sentiment, and I agree with you regarding Israel's position in the world community after events such as these. Clearly, Israel's actions have no long-term thinking in mind. I am merely suggesting that seeking a cease-fire for the sake cease-fire, as noble as that idea is, will not solve anything. Hizbollah won't go away, and neither will Israel's quite reactionary government. Hizbollah needs to disarm and leave, Israel needs to leave Shebaa Farms and the Golan Heigths, and international peacekeepers need to occupy that area until security is restored. However, you and I will be very naive by assuming Hizbollah will actually disarm and leave any time soon. And if that is the case, what the hell are we talking about here?
I am exasperated by the situation that never seems to end, and I hold Israel to a higher regard, but no matter how much Israel may want peace, it's not enough. Barak was as dove'ish as the Israelis get, and nobody on the other side seemed to want to take advantage of it. And even though he maybe didn't go far enough in some of his offers, the PLO didn't go anywhere. And the Israelis' sentiments since then has been that none of their neighbors really want peace. Simplistic and childish? Yes. But when you live in that environment, you tend to think about security more than about what's ethically and morally right or wrong.

Mikhail from SF
by Tsarrio (dj_tsar@yahoo.com) on Fri Aug 4th, 2006 at 07:40:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I maybe failed to see an article ... about 150 rockets launchd by Hizbollah

you may

In Jerusalem, Prime Minister Ehud Olmert told Reuters he wanted the international force to be mandated to enforce a U.N. resolution that calls for Hizbollah to be disarmed, adding that Israel had already destroyed much of the group's military power.

Soon after he spoke, one of more than 150 rockets launched by Hizbollah on Wednesday landed just inside the West Bank after flying further than any fired at Israel in the past three weeks.

Hizbollah said it had hit the Israeli town of Beit Shean, almost 70 km (45 miles) from the border, with "Khaibar 1" rockets to avenge Israeli attacks on civilians in Lebanon.



Nothing is 'mere'. — Richard P. Feynman
by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Fri Aug 4th, 2006 at 01:07:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]
an editorial by someone supporting Hizbollah

My head just blew up.

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.

by DoDo on Fri Aug 4th, 2006 at 04:53:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]
BTW, good think you remind me to flag this:

about the fact that the Qana death toll was overstated

  1. Why would 28 or 41 dead instead of 54 absolve Israel of anything?

  2. For your pleasure:

The initial estimate of 54 persons killed was based on a register of 63 persons who had sought shelter in the basement of the building that was struck, and rescue teams having located nine survivors. It now appears that at least 22 people escaped the basement, and 28 are confirmed dead, according to records from the Lebanese Red Cross and the government hospital in Tyre.  

Thirteen people remain missing, and some Qana residents fear they are buried in the rubble, although recovery efforts have stopped.  

3) Much more relevant is HRW's next report IDF Fails to Explain Qana Bombing, which contains these snippets:

...IDF ... did not say whether it believed that Hezbollah fighters were in or around the building at the time of or directly prior to the attack, which would potentially make the building a legitimate target. Its failure even to make this claim suggests that fighters were not present.

...two eyewitnesses ...Human Rights Watch researchers ...None of the international journalists, rescue workers and international observers who visited the scene has yet reported seeing evidence of Hezbollah military presence in the area, and rescue workers have not yet recovered any bodies identifiable as Hezbollah fighters.  

...It remains unclear why the IDF, with superior aerial surveillance, did not know the families were there.  

...The warnings are not an excuse to shoot blindly at anyone who remains.

...a report ...documented a systematic failure by the IDF to distinguish between combatants and civilians. ...Of all the cases of civilian casualties included in the report, Human Rights Watch found, none involved Hezbollah deliberately using civilians as shields to protect them from retaliatory IDF attack.



*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.
by DoDo on Fri Aug 4th, 2006 at 05:30:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Two things: Fran would do well to make a separate top-level category for "opinion" as opposed to "Europe/World news".

Then, an "Official pro-israel document" package is propaganda. It's the official that makes it so. Embedded journalism is also propaganda. You can accuse ET of selective reporting, which is not the same thing as propaganda.

Nothing is 'mere'. — Richard P. Feynman

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Fri Aug 4th, 2006 at 01:14:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Then, an "Official pro-israel document" package is propaganda. It's the official that makes it so. [...]You can accuse ET of selective reporting, which is not the same thing as propaganda.

Exactly, and 'selective reporting' is a much more fuzzy concept.

Embedded journalism is also propaganda.

No. We're talking a war zone here and journalists reporting on the military of one party to the conflict is not in and of itself propaganda. Nor is it propaganda when journalists are taken by one party in the conflict  on tours.  

by MarekNYC on Fri Aug 4th, 2006 at 01:36:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Because propaganda is not a fuzzy concept, it is much easier to say it is a wrong accusation on the part of Tsarrio.

Nothing is 'mere'. — Richard P. Feynman
by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Fri Aug 4th, 2006 at 01:48:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Uhm, I think you all need a little background on the meaning of Propaganda...

Since we are all humans and incapable of being entirely objective, the word "propaganda" carries little weight.  It is certainly not universally recognized as a bad thing...

Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. -Voltaire

by p------- on Fri Aug 4th, 2006 at 04:50:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Two things: Fran would do well to make a separate top-level category for "opinion" as opposed to "Europe/World news".

I suggested earlier to indicate op-eds by writing out the writers' name alongside the news site's name.

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.

by DoDo on Fri Aug 4th, 2006 at 04:58:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:

Occasional Series