Can we call Israel, the terrorist state of Israel now?
Always have been. israel is formed on stolen Palestinian land by terrorism action.
… that phrase “formed on stolen land” … to who reminds me that again?
Settler-colonies recognize each other
Way ahead of you!
This most certainly is not “World News”. This is a self-promoting opinion piece bordering on conspiracy theory.
To me, this attack has the master’s prints all over it — the USA had to be involved.
Edit: I really don’t understand how this article is still up. This is written as a theory of how explosive material could have been inserted into pagers. I find the piece compelling and of interest but it is not news - it’s speculation. Is it now okay to post recipes from around the world in worldnews?
This article is an analysis of a recent global event, speculation of the probable cause, and some discussion of the broader implications. It makes perfect sense to be in world news.
You seem to have had a strong emotional reaction to the suggestion that the US might have helped Israel carry out a particular ttack on another country. We’re you aware that this happens literally every day?
Speculation from some random on the internet is not world news.
I have a strong opinion about people promoting their own speculation blog in a forum where that does not belong.
Isn’t it world news that “Israel” attacked Lebanon twice with compromised pagers, or do articles have to come from state-approved sources to be considered news?
This is a self-promoting opinion piece boring on conspiracy theory.
What makes you say “conspiracy theory” exactly?
You’re not a journalist and speculation is not news. You’re a basement dweller with no first hand account of anything.
There are appropriate places for your work. This is not the place.
You didn’t answer any of my questions and your hostility is more funny than anything. Do you also get this kneejerk reaction when the NYT or the Guardian publish an opinion piece calling to bomb Iran? Because these count as news, they’re published in real newspapers after all!
News outlets very specifically include sections such as Opinion. They do not include speculative conspiracy theories on the front page (or anywhere) labeled as News.
What’s the difference between an opinion section and what you deem “speculative conspiracy theories”?
As a matter of fact what’s the difference between their front page news and the NYT directly quoting Bush making the case to go to war with Iraq? Weren’t they also passing off speculative (Saddam was responsible for 9/11) conspiracy theories (Iraq had WMDs) as News?
Or is the problem that they are more famous than me thus their opinion is worth more than mine?
What’s the difference between an opinion section and what you deem “speculative conspiracy theories”?
That’s wholly irrelevant. If you want to be an investigative reporter and get real facts to report, have at it and post it as news. You have not done this. You are making guesses. Guesses, by someone with no qualifications or influence, are not news.
Anything spoken / written by a political leader is news. If you were someone who influenced millions of people, your opinion would be news.
If I sat down and wrote out a blog about how I believe the 9/11 attacks were orchestrated, would that be News? I mean, I guess you would argue that it is but I am telling you, by definition, it most certainly is not.
I don’t know what makes you believe your armchair speculation is NEWS. The disconnect is so vast that my brain is breaking. I don’t understand how people on this earth have chosen to ignore the definition of words to suit their own narrative and feelings.
I don’t know, I just find it funny that you care so much about this. It’s just lemmy.
You’re not a journalist
from reading, don’t believe you (oxjox) happen to even know who CriticalResist8 is let alone who he works for or anything else and that what you want to spread as truth about him (her?) really only is your weak personal shortthought quick-response-cause-i-can-insult-someone opinion. But of course i do not “know” if that is true about you even though i happen to believe that now. how could i know?
i didn’t think CR8 was a journalist either, but i wouldn’t state that i knew he wasn’t until i actually know that as a fact. Do you know that as a fact? Did you check his identity, papers or such?
There are appropriate places for your work. This is not the place.
please, oxjox, do not spread untrue informations or unproven guesses as truth about other people here, lemmy is not a place for such or any type of insults. thank you for not doing such again !!
Did you check his identity, papers or such?
How broken are you people to not understand what is news and what is speculative opinion? This is not a debate. This is a matter of facts.
Who counts as a journalist?
Someone reporting news. OP is NOT reporting news. They are speculating. This is an opinion piece. They’re a fine writer and thinker but not a journalist and not reporting factual news.
what the fuck are you talking about
OP has written an article speculating how explosives could have been inserted into pagers. It’s not news, it’s speculation. Speculation is not news, it’s opinion.
What’s gonna happen if the post stays up? Probably nothing, so why are you upset
I wasn’t upset at all until people started claiming that the unsubstantiated speculations by some irrelevant person is the same as world news.
It’s a great thought provoking piece of work. It’s just not news.
It’s fine. If the rules of this forum are no longer relevant, I just won’t subscribe to it anymore. The internet sucks.
But isn’t so much journalism nowadays characterised by unsubstantiated speculation? (i.e. propaganda, if not simply clickbait filler pretending analysis)
It seems to me your criticism amounts essentially to your dislike of the thesis of this piece. This can be legitimate, but not what you’ve argued here.
Isn’t this piece an example of precisely the supposed promise of the internet, in the sense that journalism becomes democratised and anyone can publish and disseminate analysis, which can be evaluated on its merits rather than institutional validation and inertia based on opaque criteria? (I would of course argue the aggregated needs of capital, but I won’t force that in)
It’s “America bad” so it’s ok
