World News
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
- Blogsites are treated in the same manner as social media sites. Medium, Blogger, Substack, etc. are not valid news links regardless of who is posting them. Yes, legitimate news sites use Blogging platforms, they also use Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube and we don't allow those links either.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
view the rest of the comments
I'm not a chatbot, you can read the article yourself and find out these things. I haven't insisted the article is credible. Go back and read what I wrote and you'll see that
I don't understand your objection then, sorry.
If you can't understand why someone wouldn't go out in front of the world and make big statements in line with these claims, or any statement at all, immediately after a very traumatising experience then you really need to work on your empathy and understanding of basic human emotion. I understand your skepticism, to a point. I just gave a very obvious reason why she hasn't talked about the harrowing things she went through in detail to the public straight away, whether they are as is said in this article or not. Even thinking about them is going to be very difficult for her, nevermind doing what you're expecting
Edit: Taken out a sentence that isn't relevant, as I thought you were the OP of this comment thread before
I don't disagree with the sentiment at all, I just think when you report news like this, you do it responsibly. One of the reasons we're in the situation that we're in with massive distrust of institutions on the one hand, but widespread believe in conspiracy theories on the other is because fact checking has fled a lot of buildings, and depending on your biases people either doubt everything or believe everything dogmatically. There are other reasons of course, and root causes. But it sucks and is tearing us apart.
The Guardian article is worded much more equivocally. "Another detainee" claims she had to kiss the flag. She has given statements herself, but hasn't corroborated the other claims including of her own having been forced to do so. Heresay in general and limited sources.
All I'm asking is that articles make this obvious and don't sensationalize, like the article posted by OP. Whatever the case, the abuses by Israel we have solid evidence for are bad enough.
Mate can you actually read? I replied to your comment to push back against you expecting Greta to be standing up on a platform and immediately talking about all of this stuff to the world when she's going to be very traumatised. And that she would be whether what the article says is true or not. That's it. Nothing else
My whole point has been about that, not about the article and it's accuracy. The only times I've said anything about the latter is cos you keep somehow not understanding that I'm not talking about the accuracy of the article and bringing it back up again. And even then the only thing I really said in response to that was pushing back against you saying The Canary is niche when it actually isn't really. And also telling you to read it, seeing as you clearly hadn't from what you've said in replies. You didn't understand entirely what you were arguing against in the article and now you're not understanding my point at all and have somehow gone off thinking I'm saying things that I'm not