Big if true. People are losing their fucking jobs because they dared to say innocent Palestinians shouldn't be mowed down with US-supplied weapons.

Yeah, no shit. Though you do have to provide proofs, even to the obvious.

😲

Neoliberal rags favor neoliberal world order, intrepid investigator discovers

news flash!

o_0

This is the best summary I could come up with:

The print media outlets, which play an influential role in shaping U.S. views of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict, paid little attention to the unprecedented impact of Israel’s siege and bombing campaign on both children and journalists in the Gaza Strip.

The open-source analysis focuses on the first six weeks of the conflict, from the October 7 Hamas-led attacks that killed 1,139 Israelis and foreign workers to November 24, the beginning of the weeklong “humanitarian truce” agreed to by both parties to facilitate hostage exchanges.

The stakes for this routine devaluing of Palestinian lives couldn’t be higher: As the death toll in Gaza mounts, entire cities are leveled and rendered uninhabitable for years, and whole family lines are wiped out, the U.S. government has enormous influence as Israel’s primary patron and weapons supplier.

In a notable exception, the New York Times ran a late-November front-page story on the historic pace of killings of Palestinian women and children, though the headline featured neither group.

On October 13, the Los Angeles Times ran an Associated Press report that said, “The Gaza Health Ministry said Friday that 1,799 people have been killed in the territory, including more than 580 under the age of 18 and 351 women.

Despite this asymmetry, polls show shifting sympathy toward Palestinians and away from Israel among Democrats, with massive generational splits driven, in part, by a stark difference in news sources.

The original article contains 1,783 words, the summary contains 231 words. Saved 87%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

:o

Adam Johnson always provides great analysis.

Water is wet