I actually do agree that “and then Biden went on Twitter and said some dumb shit about it” is an important addition to make to the story. I just don’t think it is two of the most important nine words that the New York Times would want to communicate about the protest, and I think it’s notable that it forms such a huge feature in the (again 100% accurate) narrative about the Western media doing its thing and lying about Palestine and Palestine protestors.
Actually - I would be pretty confident that a random sampling of all the stories in the media would show most of them simply covering the protest, and that only a small number which then were included in this screenshot featured the word “Biden.” Maybe I am wrong but that would be my guess.
This is interesting. Look at all those videos. I wish reporters would stop posting on X, though. Is this a good source? Those Twitter accounts? I’m not too familiar with the Cat and the other reporter they mentioned.
Yeah. Most of them are like that - coverage of the protest. Or, some have coverage of the wrong “antisemitism” reaction to the violence, which obviously is relevant, without for some reason singling out only Biden’s rendition of it (e.g. including Newsom or Bass etc).
(Actually - the thing I really wish they would do is report on the “antisemitism” accusation and then break down exactly why it is wrong. Every single Lemmy commenter - or the vast majority of them - can read the coverage and explain why them singling out this synagogue for this protest had nothing to do with Judaism (it was actually in ozma’s story, I think, that the pro-Israel side actually also attacked a rabbi who was trying to break it up). So… why can’t the journalists figure that out?)
Actually, if you take out the New York Times and Forbes, almost no one decided to include Biden front and center in their headline about it.
Sure, let me rephrase: No legitimate reason
I actually do agree that “and then Biden went on Twitter and said some dumb shit about it” is an important addition to make to the story. I just don’t think it is two of the most important nine words that the New York Times would want to communicate about the protest, and I think it’s notable that it forms such a huge feature in the (again 100% accurate) narrative about the Western media doing its thing and lying about Palestine and Palestine protestors.
Actually - I would be pretty confident that a random sampling of all the stories in the media would show most of them simply covering the protest, and that only a small number which then were included in this screenshot featured the word “Biden.” Maybe I am wrong but that would be my guess.
Here Mozz… With multiple videos of the incidents
https://westsidetoday.com/2024/06/24/violence-erupts-at-protest-outside-adas-torah-synagogue-in-pico-robertson/
This is interesting. Look at all those videos. I wish reporters would stop posting on X, though. Is this a good source? Those Twitter accounts? I’m not too familiar with the Cat and the other reporter they mentioned.
So… why didn’t you share this instead?
Yeah. Most of them are like that - coverage of the protest. Or, some have coverage of the wrong “antisemitism” reaction to the violence, which obviously is relevant, without for some reason singling out only Biden’s rendition of it (e.g. including Newsom or Bass etc).
(Actually - the thing I really wish they would do is report on the “antisemitism” accusation and then break down exactly why it is wrong. Every single Lemmy commenter - or the vast majority of them - can read the coverage and explain why them singling out this synagogue for this protest had nothing to do with Judaism (it was actually in ozma’s story, I think, that the pro-Israel side actually also attacked a rabbi who was trying to break it up). So… why can’t the journalists figure that out?)
Actually, if you take out the New York Times and Forbes, almost no one decided to include Biden front and center in their headline about it.