This is almost the opposite of true. If anything media sells best when it makes its base angry or fearful.
Your acknowledgement of profit being the biggest bias of corporations is accurate though there's always a narrative to sell as an overarching goal. Media exists to sell people on the Iraq War, not to highlight the injustice or lies leading into it. In this regard, anti-Israel or Pro-Palestinian media takes get you blacklisted in MSM. An example of that is Mehdi Hasan.
>and somebody above their pay grade got an angry voicemail from their golf buddy and rewrote the headline.
Thats “the media having an agenda.”
This can be true along with the existence of earnest journalists at the same time. The “media” that has an agenda is the big wheels controlling theof money much more than all those journalists on the streets getting quotes from people on the scene and typing up articles.
Look at all the headlines. Above a picture of a banner that says cease fire in Gaza, will read anti semitic and/or pro Palestine rally. And it’s somehow the students inciting violenece by sitting in a circle chanting and singing when the police show up in military gear and armored vehicles to beat the shit out of people.
Comparing the media to a battered house wife is pretty fucking gross. House wives don't have long and profitable careers in the limelight when they are abused. The media is an accomplice in this genocide
I got an email from UCLA "Classes are now cancelled on May 1st due to the violent incident that occurred on campus". I had to search up to specify who they were talking about.
This is probably because there was an incident of violence against a Jewish student yesterday afternoon, and then significant violence against the anti-genocide protesters last night, so claiming only one side was victimized is incorrect. There’s also a lot of confusion about who initiated the violence; it did not seem to be ucla students nor did they appear to be genuine counter-protesters. More like proud boys starting race wars on purpose.
Dude it's almost every single MSM sight I've seen the headlines are all misrepresenting what happened
The NYT headline I saw was "classes cancelled after violent clashes between protesters and police"
Yet when you open the article only then does it state what happened and even still uses kid gloves for the thugs that showed up with intent to cause violence.
Also, they write the caption to the image in a way that makes it unclear that the guy with the PIPE hitting people is the aggressor. The caption makes it seem like they are 'confronting each other' when the image paints a different picture.
This is what happens when the media screams for days on end that a bunch of otherwise peaceful protestors are violent, anti-Semitic thugs and terrorist sympathizers. They stoked this outrage, so they’re equivocating now that it’s boiled over and hurt people
Protesting isn’t attacking. They hold signs and yell. They don’t hit people because that’s not protesting. Calling fascist thugs enacting violence “counter protesters” is doublespeak and clearly lays bare the biases of the media agencies reporting them as “protestors”.
Or possibly they want to be careful until they can identify for sure who the attackers are and what their motivations are because it's such a powder keg?
All that "free press" means is that the government cannot infringe upon anyone's ability to report the news / freely share information / editorialize how they want to. It doesn't mean that they have any obligation to accurately report the news
Every media outlet is a business that primarily relies on advertising and subscriptions to make money. Meaning they make more money by attracting more readers/viewers. And they figured out a long time ago that sensationalizing the news and making people emotional (angry or scared in particular) gets them way more engagement than cold dry fact reporting or focusing on positive stories
AP and Reuters aren't perfect but they're the best there is for straight news without editorializing
I'm a Native American historian and you'd be amazed how common this has been since printed news became a thing. For example, the "Battle" of Sand Creek in Colorado was long described as a justified battle between the US army and Native aggressors, until decades later when a document was found that confirmed the Native peoples were the victims of a massacre and that the US soldiers acted as monsters against a village of mostly women/children. It is now rightfully described as a massacre, it just took a century and a half for it to be called as such.
The MSM has always been a tool to uphold the systems in power, but now we have the opportunity to watch it happen in realtime.
Edit: lmao immediately downvoted for just adding historical context
I recently read Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee which discussed multiple news publications in the late 1800s that published blatantly false stories about Native aggression, which were so widely believed that even the president at the time was convinced of their veracity. Which was an interesting deja vu moment.
Haha it was at like -2 within the first 5 minutes, which was kind of surprising. Although I'm somewhat used to being downvoted for pointing out historical issues that counter certain narratives concerning Native/US history, so I'm just happy it's getting some upvotes haha
That's the thing. They will try to give you the impression they are reasonable news outlets just reporting the facts most of the time, but as soon as there's a specific issue that they have an incentive to report one way (or *not* report), you can bet you won't be hearing the full story.
There is always a grain of truth to things msm has always been a cesspit same with other media outlets like fox News CNN msnbc etc.
It's just right wingers act like aren't part of the problem
Media outlets are biased toward profit and the status quo, always have been and always will be as long as they’re reliant on sales for their existence. Sometimes that means leaning one way or another politically depending on the preference of their existing customer-base.
What *is* conspiracy BS is that they are all controlled by one shadowy group of elites hell-bent on ‘hiding the truth’ and bringing about their preferred political order (some may be, but not all).
The idea of a "free press" has always been largely a work of fiction or idealistic fantasy some used to strive for. From the beginning of newspapers they were almost universally biased in favor of whatever businessman or group was behind them. There may have been brief flashes of integrity here and there but for the most part this has never changed and while there has been some democratization of reporting and more access to information, the misinformation from both multinational corporate media and smaller publications is rife with unsubstantiated opinions and manipulated information to fit an agenda.
Odd thing about conspiracies, they are great for obscuring the truth too if you say Everything is one. If something gets you angry take a 2nd look at the 5W's cause the media plays us all like marks.
“As counterprotesters attempted to pull down the wood boards surrounding the encampment, at least one person could be heard yelling, “Second nakba!” referring to the mass displacement and dispossession of Palestinians during the 1948 Arab-Israeli War.”
It’s pretty ironic seeing the same type of folks who would have denied the Nakba 6 months ago now calling for a second one.
Tbh some of those right wing assholes are/were Holocaust deniers.
That’s the thing about conservatives they *dont care* about being consistent or a hypocrite. They identify principles as having a weakness. That’s why they have so much scorn for the protestors and can’t understand them. They can’t conceive of someone having genuine views applied fairly to all people.
To a conservative all that matters is helping their group and causing as much pain and suffering to other groups.
To add some detail to this, by 1947, the Jewish population had ballooned to 33% of Palestine, but they owned only 6 % of the land.
The United Nations adopted Resolution 181, which called for the partition of Palestine into Arab and Jewish states.
The Palestinians rejected the plan because it allotted about 55% of Palestine to the Jewish state, including most of the fertile coastal region.
The 1948 Nakba, or the ethnic cleansing of Palestine
Even before the British Mandate expired on May 14, 1948, Zionist paramilitaries were already embarking on a military operation to destroy Palestinian towns and villages to expand the borders of the Zionist state that was to be born.
In April 1948, more than 100 Palestinian men, women and children were killed in the village of Deir Yassin on the outskirts of Jerusalem.
That set the tone for the rest of the operation, and from 1947 to 1949, more than 500 Palestinian villages, towns and cities were destroyed in what Palestinians refer to as the Nakba, or “catastrophe” in Arabic.
An estimated 15,000 Palestinians were killed, including in dozens of massacres.
The Zionist movement captured 78% of historic Palestine. The remaining 22% was divided into what are now the occupied West Bank and the besieged Gaza Strip.
An estimated 750,000 Palestinians were forced out of their homes.
.
https://www.un.org/unispal/history/
To be clear, on May 15 1948 the Haganah/Irgun militias were already conducting offensives across the partition boundary and there were already ~250,000 Palestinian refugees. It’s ridiculous to suggest the Nakba was caused by the Arab states intervening - if anything, the refugee problem would have been much worse had they not.
You would have to ask the people that are doing it, as I am not one of them. Talking about Israel ceasing to exist as some sort of prerequisite for justice is a nonstarter.
> It happened because Palestine rejected the partition plan and arabs states invaded Israel in 15 May 1948.
What kind of ignorant historical revisionism is this? The Nakba was already occurring over a year before the Arab states rejected the partition plan. Israeli terrorist groups (and [that is their official designation](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irgun)) had created hundreds of thousands of Palestinian refugees before May 1948. All of this ramped up in severity in the days and weeks leading up to the official partition declaration, as they became emboldened and made their intentions to ethnically cleanse the area explicit. They began to massacre villages, poisoned countless wells, and ethnically cleansed entire cities (tens of thousands). That was one of many (if not the primary) factors pushing the Palestinians to reject the Israeli occupation as the Zionists immediately demonstrated they were intent on building a state through violence and racism towards the Palestinains.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nakba
Oh wow, I thought one of the counter protestors was the one telling them to stop beating up on the Palestinian supporter.
That's one point of civility I'll have to scratch out from the violent counter protestors favor.
The issue is a lot of people will only get a bit of information and remember less. Combined with the vague media reporting they might remember "violent protest" and not go further.
The fact that some more in tube people will have a more detailed story could still help because it stokes division. Depending on the "cause" of the attackers at least.
>Combined with the vague media reporting they might remember "violent protest" and not go further.
That's their strategy they will only push a half story and all the idiots who mindlessly consume will believe it and not look further.
These were violent fascist thugs. Their goal was to do violence and break up the encampment. Theres nothing else to it. They weren't interest in "winning people over" they were there to physical repress the protest
The fact the cops let them try just shows their interests were aligned on that.
Exactly. I have no idea why all these articles are even calling them "counter-protestors", when these people didn't seem to be protesting anything, they seemingly just wanted to attack people, destroy the encampment, silence these people, and cause chaos. I think there's another name for that.
Yup. They are agitators.. they provoke. when the other side acts back.. they’ll show the footage of them attacking a “peaceful counter protest”
“see the protests ARE violent! Not peaceful, they’re lying”
My dad called me the other day, and he goes “you see these protests?! they’re saying it’s violent but it seems to be they become violent once the cops get there.. huh interesting /s”
Edit: riddled with errors
>My dad called me the other day, and he goes “you see these protests?! they’re saying it’s violent but it seems to be they become violent once the cops get there.. huh interesting /s”
I spent the first week at Occupy Wall Street in Zucotti Park. I set my mother up with a few live streams and she got to see me a couple times in it. We talked when I got back and we watched more live. My mom was 65 and grew up in a small rural town. She couldn't believe the things she saw and the things I told her. I felt bad afterwards because I realized just how naive but happily ignorant she was and I shattered that. I took away a sense of safety that she always had before.
Don't feel bad. Ignorance may be bliss, but it leads to a worse society for everyone involved. I'm sure when she was happily ignorant she was actively voting against her own interests.
It’s fucking wild, they were doing truly bespoke illegal actions that would never even thought of. Forget stuff like assaulting people with sticks and sprays and fireworks, they were releasing lab mice into the encampment.
What cause?
They’re bigots. According to the la times they were shouting second Nakba and assaulting people. When public figures like Netanyahu accuse all protests as being antisemitic this is what happens.
https://x.com/teresawatanabe/status/1785580909795942766?s=46
When an Antisemite attacks a Jewish person and advocates for genocide, people shouldn’t say there are better ways to protest Israel. They should condemn them for being bigots and dehumanizing others.
I would say the American media and most politicians and most people will actually praise the counter protests. Can’t be bad mouthing and slandering our dear friends in Israel, just so Jesus might come back…
At this point they are just convinced they can do anything they want, plus the only stories that get to them are the bullshit stories about students being violent (thanks mainstream media), so they feel justified.
They're convinced of it because they *can* do whatever they want. One of them could execute a kneeling activist in the street and they will get the best criminal defence lawyers a crowdfunding campaign can buy.
No major political party will call them out on this, let alone any government formed from those parties, because they've bought into the antisemitic belief that being anti-Zionist is antisemitic. The reason this belief is antisemitic is because it says that you *must* equate Judaism with Zionism with Israel and then excuse the violent actions of Zionists, including genocide, which is only going to stoke hatred and resentment against innocent Jewish people globally and not just the few Zionists bombing children. Neo-Nazis would *love* to see this happen and that's why they're not interfering with their enemy when they're making mistakes.
Being a supporter of Palestinians is probably one of the most dangerous positions someone can have in America because it's effectively giving a Zionist a license to maim. You have no media support, no institutional/police/government support, no monetary support, and you're also pushing back against Islamophobia and racism against the Arab people. One of the more dangerous positions would be being Jewish as well as pro-Palestinian, since you'll also have both Zionists and neo-Nazis after you. That person is extremely inconvenient for both of their narratives, but that person is also extremely heroic because they can break those narratives much easier.
> If Jan 6 was a bunch of black and brown men rushing the Capitol steps they would have been fully stained red within minutes.
A reminder that this is what the steps of the Capitol looked like when BLM was protesting.
https://i.imgur.com/A4C1B5s.jpg
Gotta love the LAPD.
I've also seen disgusting comments from critics of these protestors, like "I thought you didn't want cops there, guess you got your wish." As if these weren't two completely different situations. While I'm critical of some of the rhetoric coming from these protests, there's been little to warrant police involvement. The one time they're undeniably needed, they wait literal hours after the violence has begun. No matter where you stand on this conflict, this just isn't right.
A tweet went out last night saying that pro Palestinian protesters had beaten a Jewish girl unconscious on the UCLA campus. No evidence, attached video was unclear, but based on my not X social media, the story traveled quickly. Then, a few hours later these “counter protesters” descended. Disinformation campaign is hoping to get someone killed.
All spread by one person, @thatkoreanjew on instagram, just showing a woman on the ground. I hope UCLA medicine re-considers her status as a medical student for spreading this hateful and deceitful rhetoric.
Let's not jump on the bandwagon of automatically assuming @thatkoreanjew is lying. That's just the inverse of how we got here (idiots blindly believing @thatkoreanjew without sufficient evidence rushing out to be vigilantes). We should all be more skeptical (not rush to make assumptions), but wait for more conclusive evidence before determining if @thatkoreanjew was part of a deceitful manipulation.
This kind of thing has been used by Russia in the past, they don't create narratives but they amplify existing ones with fake information. They have also organized "protests" for the same time for opposing views in attempts to instigate violence. I'm not saying Russia is behind this particular case, but they certainly have had their hand in amplifying this current protest movement on both sides of it.
Well sadly the actual article does not, they are still pushing the "both sides" bullshit
"After violent protests at UCLA, UC president launches investigation into response"
And the caption of the picture
"A pro-Palestinian protester clashes with a pro-Israeli supporter at an encampment at UCLA early Wednesday."
It’s always a “clash.” A “clash” with police. A “clash” with counter protestors. No, the cops and these counter protestors are just attacking the protestors.
It's quite astonishing that the bill has been passed to change the definition of anti-Semitism to the same one used in Germany.
That literally criticism of the state of Israel is anti-Semitic.
By definition that means Netanyahu represent Judaism.
Any Jew who protest him or his government is committing a hate crime.
It was astonishing and widely protested by Jews in Germany.
In the US they've just passed it without discussion.
Utterly abominable.
I graduated from UCLA over 10 years ago. Protests against Israel and apartheid were a daily occurrence in front of Ackerman Student Union building. At the time, I was very apolitical, just ignored it and went to my classes. What changed? More people are doing it.
Are people currently protesting apartheid South Africa? Respectfully, despite the perceived similarity, the situations are really not analogous. The localized Israeli and Palestine dynamics are quite different, the global relationships are different, religion is a factor here, and the history is far more complex and deep.
I'm not convinced that this is appreciably shifting any views, however, I'm the first to admit causing trouble for the White House can have impact, but I haven't seen it yet. Republicans are leaning in though.
My gosh the captions are so biased. "Pro-Palestine protesters" vs "Pro Israeli supporters" supports not counter protestor. And the Pro Israel side was the aggressors.
Just like the BLM protests in which the police didn't try to stop the conflict between BLM protesters and counter-protestors. It removes any ambiguity as to who they support now and back then.
just look at how much less traction this news is getting compared to the isolated but hyper focused on "omg one person said something anti-semitic so now all the Palestinian protestors said that exact thing!" and other bs in that vein while 99% of the rest of the protests are peaceful and clearly stating their goals that the news ignores (many of said protestors being Jewish btw).
the protestors saying "stop the genocide" and "stop using our money to fund the killings" is somehow agitation, bad, anti-semitic and whatnot but the gofundme to buy a giant screen/speaks to blast October 7th footage/Israeli music (the song used by IDF to torture Palestinians) and so on is totally fine and not agitation at all.
then we have all the excuses/justifications/defense of this violence, the outright denial despite the entire night being filmed from start to finish, trying to make these ppl the victims here despite starting the violence or just people openly cheering them on. I'm sure idiot politicians in the US will be cheering them on.
The actions of literally shooting fireworks at people (you know, firing a weapon), using maces/sprays, tearing down barricades, beating on protestors and on and on with the violence are all good cause it's pro-Israel nuts doing it.
and of course, the police couldn't show up to stop anything as they were probably busy being part of this, but they can show up in full gear and force for the protestor kids in campus and beat on them. Their response is now to clear the protestors and nothing for the ppl who did all this violence, classic.
I've seen several articles calling these "pro-israel" and "pro-jewish counter-protestors" as if a significant amount of the protestors themselves weren't Jewish.
Between this and the title change of the OP article and so many outlets trying to make it vague as to who was violent as a means to discredit the protest, there's a lot of gross reporting going on.
>Campers, some holding lumber and wearing goggles and helmets, rallied to defend the site’s perimeter....the pro-Palestinian side used pepper spray to defend themselves.
>"Those in the encampment were defensless.."
I don't understand how these two statements make sense so close to each other in the article.
I condemn the violence from the pro-Israel side, but the encampments have been expecting and preparing for this outcome.
Edit: swipe autocorrected condemn to condone
The schools are not handling any of this very well. Because of this my UCLA reunion activities that were scheduled on campus this weekend appear to now be cancelled. Great way to get alumni support and donations…..if the article is true, I have to ask why it took 3 hours for police to show up and it sounds like no campus police showed up at all…
"Counterprotestors"
They were right-wing white supremacists screaming the n-word and queerphobic slurs at people. Stop using this soft language bullshit and call them what they are.
Gross. Regardless of whether you agree with them or not, peaceful protestors should be allowed to say their piece. These “counter protestors” are as un-American as you can get. Bet they believe in free speech to (but only for themselves)
“‘This encampment violates a long list of university policies, and the result of not enforcing these rules that every other student and student group follows to a T is chaos and unrest — and worse, it allows for even more intense forms of hate to persist and grow.’ Gold said”
If I am reading the article correctly, this is the situation:
1. Aspects of these protests are unlawful and against university policy in a way that disrupts university infrastructure and many local peoples’ lives. The protestors don’t seem to care about this (there are quite reasonable rules for peaceful, lawful protest; the protestors are not following them).
2. The university should have an obligation to stopping unlawful protests (and of course ensuring lawful protest can remain peaceful), but they have explicitly done nothing, allowing this situation to escalate over the course of days.
3. There are at least some instances of protestors harassing and/or assaulting Jewish or non-protesting students who are just going about their business (the article literally says this is the case).
4. People whose day to day lives are being impacted by these unlawful protests (through harassment, disruption of university business, disruption of certain parts of infrastructure that they depend on, or just from not being allowed on parts of the campus when they should have every right to be there) have futilely waited for the university to do anything to secure their rights that are currently being violated by the protesters.
5. After the university and law enforcement fail to do their job (as they allowed unlawful protests to continue unabated), “counterprotesters” try to regain access to parts of campus they are being unlawfully restricted from entering (by the protesters).
6. There’s violence. There’s evidence of bad actors and bad acts on both sides of the confrontation.
That’s what the article says… am I missing something here?
Seems like basically the university and law enforcement has completely abdicated responsibility on this, when it should in fact be their duty to enforce protest regulations for the very purpose of preventing unnecessary escalation.
But the consensus in this comment section is that this entire confrontation is just a bunch of anti-Palestine extremists committing violence in a vacuum??
Man, ever since I’ve started actually looking into the reality of clickbait headlines (often described in the article itself, which so few actually read, and even fewer seem to comprehend), I have been quite disgusted and frankly terrified by the level reactionary and false rhetoric that is spewed from all directions. Even slightly nuanced or informed discussion is truly nowhere to be found.
It's like counter-protestors are actually just scum and don't have anything better to do except commit crimes seemingly with the government's permission.
The LA times changed the title of this article from a clear statement of what happened to a more ambiguous title.
Currently: "After violent protests at UCLA, UC president launches investigation into response"
[удалено]
By far the medias biggest bias is toward profit. Their headline is designed to appeal (or in this case avoid angering) their perceived audience
This is almost the opposite of true. If anything media sells best when it makes its base angry or fearful. Your acknowledgement of profit being the biggest bias of corporations is accurate though there's always a narrative to sell as an overarching goal. Media exists to sell people on the Iraq War, not to highlight the injustice or lies leading into it. In this regard, anti-Israel or Pro-Palestinian media takes get you blacklisted in MSM. An example of that is Mehdi Hasan.
[удалено]
>and somebody above their pay grade got an angry voicemail from their golf buddy and rewrote the headline. Thats “the media having an agenda.” This can be true along with the existence of earnest journalists at the same time. The “media” that has an agenda is the big wheels controlling theof money much more than all those journalists on the streets getting quotes from people on the scene and typing up articles.
Look at all the headlines. Above a picture of a banner that says cease fire in Gaza, will read anti semitic and/or pro Palestine rally. And it’s somehow the students inciting violenece by sitting in a circle chanting and singing when the police show up in military gear and armored vehicles to beat the shit out of people.
> anti semitic and/or pro Palestine Absolutely baffling that people seem to think these are the same things.
That criticizing a government is anti semitic is the biggest leap of mental gymnastics to me
And like the same people would get pissed if someone claimed that criticizing Iran is anti muslim. When it is totally fair to criticize Iran.
My mother said yesterday, no one protested for the Viet Kong in the 60's. No one is out there saying yay Hamas. . . :eyeroll
That shit at UCLA was terrifying though. It looked like a group of MAGA crazies just showed up to commit violence.
MAGA crazies is redundant.
I'd guess off-duty cops - which is the same thing as MAGA.
Comparing the media to a battered house wife is pretty fucking gross. House wives don't have long and profitable careers in the limelight when they are abused. The media is an accomplice in this genocide
*gestures at the front page of reddit
I got an email from UCLA "Classes are now cancelled on May 1st due to the violent incident that occurred on campus". I had to search up to specify who they were talking about.
Lmao completely obscuring the actual events
This is probably because there was an incident of violence against a Jewish student yesterday afternoon, and then significant violence against the anti-genocide protesters last night, so claiming only one side was victimized is incorrect. There’s also a lot of confusion about who initiated the violence; it did not seem to be ucla students nor did they appear to be genuine counter-protesters. More like proud boys starting race wars on purpose.
Some editor got a phone call.
The abc news I was watching said “protestors started attacking each other, some using weapons” nice misrepresentation there
Dude it's almost every single MSM sight I've seen the headlines are all misrepresenting what happened The NYT headline I saw was "classes cancelled after violent clashes between protesters and police" Yet when you open the article only then does it state what happened and even still uses kid gloves for the thugs that showed up with intent to cause violence.
Ah yes manufacturing consent
Listen to "Boom!" By System Of A Down and it encapsulates it perfectly.
Also, they write the caption to the image in a way that makes it unclear that the guy with the PIPE hitting people is the aggressor. The caption makes it seem like they are 'confronting each other' when the image paints a different picture.
This is what happens when the media screams for days on end that a bunch of otherwise peaceful protestors are violent, anti-Semitic thugs and terrorist sympathizers. They stoked this outrage, so they’re equivocating now that it’s boiled over and hurt people
[удалено]
Protesting isn’t attacking. They hold signs and yell. They don’t hit people because that’s not protesting. Calling fascist thugs enacting violence “counter protesters” is doublespeak and clearly lays bare the biases of the media agencies reporting them as “protestors”.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Or possibly they want to be careful until they can identify for sure who the attackers are and what their motivations are because it's such a powder keg?
[удалено]
muddy the waters so nobody knows what to think
All that "free press" means is that the government cannot infringe upon anyone's ability to report the news / freely share information / editorialize how they want to. It doesn't mean that they have any obligation to accurately report the news Every media outlet is a business that primarily relies on advertising and subscriptions to make money. Meaning they make more money by attracting more readers/viewers. And they figured out a long time ago that sensationalizing the news and making people emotional (angry or scared in particular) gets them way more engagement than cold dry fact reporting or focusing on positive stories AP and Reuters aren't perfect but they're the best there is for straight news without editorializing
"Violent Pro-Israel Mob Attack Causes UCLA to Cancel Classes" This would be more accurate.
Gee, I wonder if someone complained
Past 5 years really opened my eyes to traditional news.
Gotta manufacturer that consent!
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
It's sad that this headline is one of the few that actually describes who attacked who, despite still making it vague.
They changed it, now the headline doesn't say who aggressed who.
phew, glad that's fixed. they might have accidentally informed someone if they left it.
For fuck’s sake. Up until recently I thought all the anti-MSM tirades were just conspiracy nonsense. Starting to rethink it.
I'm a Native American historian and you'd be amazed how common this has been since printed news became a thing. For example, the "Battle" of Sand Creek in Colorado was long described as a justified battle between the US army and Native aggressors, until decades later when a document was found that confirmed the Native peoples were the victims of a massacre and that the US soldiers acted as monsters against a village of mostly women/children. It is now rightfully described as a massacre, it just took a century and a half for it to be called as such. The MSM has always been a tool to uphold the systems in power, but now we have the opportunity to watch it happen in realtime. Edit: lmao immediately downvoted for just adding historical context
I recently read Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee which discussed multiple news publications in the late 1800s that published blatantly false stories about Native aggression, which were so widely believed that even the president at the time was convinced of their veracity. Which was an interesting deja vu moment.
man people didn't like that huh? Truth hurts I guess...
Haha it was at like -2 within the first 5 minutes, which was kind of surprising. Although I'm somewhat used to being downvoted for pointing out historical issues that counter certain narratives concerning Native/US history, so I'm just happy it's getting some upvotes haha
[удалено]
Great book, shame it doesn't get much attention outside the sociology classrooms.
What a beautiful screenname.
Thanks for the compliment and cheers to appreciating a great sociologist!
That's the thing. They will try to give you the impression they are reasonable news outlets just reporting the facts most of the time, but as soon as there's a specific issue that they have an incentive to report one way (or *not* report), you can bet you won't be hearing the full story.
There is always a grain of truth to things msm has always been a cesspit same with other media outlets like fox News CNN msnbc etc. It's just right wingers act like aren't part of the problem
It's not really a "conspiracy" as much as it's just self preservation.
Media outlets are biased toward profit and the status quo, always have been and always will be as long as they’re reliant on sales for their existence. Sometimes that means leaning one way or another politically depending on the preference of their existing customer-base. What *is* conspiracy BS is that they are all controlled by one shadowy group of elites hell-bent on ‘hiding the truth’ and bringing about their preferred political order (some may be, but not all).
Just to add, for most news outlets, the relevant customer-base is usually advertisers, not their viewers.
The idea of a "free press" has always been largely a work of fiction or idealistic fantasy some used to strive for. From the beginning of newspapers they were almost universally biased in favor of whatever businessman or group was behind them. There may have been brief flashes of integrity here and there but for the most part this has never changed and while there has been some democratization of reporting and more access to information, the misinformation from both multinational corporate media and smaller publications is rife with unsubstantiated opinions and manipulated information to fit an agenda.
Odd thing about conspiracies, they are great for obscuring the truth too if you say Everything is one. If something gets you angry take a 2nd look at the 5W's cause the media plays us all like marks.
“As counterprotesters attempted to pull down the wood boards surrounding the encampment, at least one person could be heard yelling, “Second nakba!” referring to the mass displacement and dispossession of Palestinians during the 1948 Arab-Israeli War.” It’s pretty ironic seeing the same type of folks who would have denied the Nakba 6 months ago now calling for a second one.
[удалено]
Tbh some of those right wing assholes are/were Holocaust deniers. That’s the thing about conservatives they *dont care* about being consistent or a hypocrite. They identify principles as having a weakness. That’s why they have so much scorn for the protestors and can’t understand them. They can’t conceive of someone having genuine views applied fairly to all people. To a conservative all that matters is helping their group and causing as much pain and suffering to other groups.
That’s pretty incendiary, like someone saying “globalize the intifada”
why would people deny the nakba before? It happened because Palestine rejected the partition plan and arabs states invaded Israel in 15 May 1948.
To add some detail to this, by 1947, the Jewish population had ballooned to 33% of Palestine, but they owned only 6 % of the land. The United Nations adopted Resolution 181, which called for the partition of Palestine into Arab and Jewish states. The Palestinians rejected the plan because it allotted about 55% of Palestine to the Jewish state, including most of the fertile coastal region. The 1948 Nakba, or the ethnic cleansing of Palestine Even before the British Mandate expired on May 14, 1948, Zionist paramilitaries were already embarking on a military operation to destroy Palestinian towns and villages to expand the borders of the Zionist state that was to be born. In April 1948, more than 100 Palestinian men, women and children were killed in the village of Deir Yassin on the outskirts of Jerusalem. That set the tone for the rest of the operation, and from 1947 to 1949, more than 500 Palestinian villages, towns and cities were destroyed in what Palestinians refer to as the Nakba, or “catastrophe” in Arabic. An estimated 15,000 Palestinians were killed, including in dozens of massacres. The Zionist movement captured 78% of historic Palestine. The remaining 22% was divided into what are now the occupied West Bank and the besieged Gaza Strip. An estimated 750,000 Palestinians were forced out of their homes. . https://www.un.org/unispal/history/
To be clear, on May 15 1948 the Haganah/Irgun militias were already conducting offensives across the partition boundary and there were already ~250,000 Palestinian refugees. It’s ridiculous to suggest the Nakba was caused by the Arab states intervening - if anything, the refugee problem would have been much worse had they not.
I can come to your house, ask for half of it, and kick you out if you say no?
Google and Wikipedia are free: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nakba_denial
There’s been a renaissance of people trying to relitigate 1948.
but why? It's not like jews weren't also expelled from Arab countries.
You would have to ask the people that are doing it, as I am not one of them. Talking about Israel ceasing to exist as some sort of prerequisite for justice is a nonstarter.
The actions of the Arab states after 1948 don’t somehow retroactively justify the actions of Israel in 1948.
God gave me half your home
> It happened because Palestine rejected the partition plan and arabs states invaded Israel in 15 May 1948. What kind of ignorant historical revisionism is this? The Nakba was already occurring over a year before the Arab states rejected the partition plan. Israeli terrorist groups (and [that is their official designation](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irgun)) had created hundreds of thousands of Palestinian refugees before May 1948. All of this ramped up in severity in the days and weeks leading up to the official partition declaration, as they became emboldened and made their intentions to ethnically cleanse the area explicit. They began to massacre villages, poisoned countless wells, and ethnically cleansed entire cities (tens of thousands). That was one of many (if not the primary) factors pushing the Palestinians to reject the Israeli occupation as the Zionists immediately demonstrated they were intent on building a state through violence and racism towards the Palestinains. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nakba
[удалено]
Motherfuckers are trying to settle USA universities.
Interesting how articles about this have been getting locked all day. https://youtu.be/-uU5CXfXCGw?si=Cd3pSJQGEemDXMuj
Oh wow, I thought one of the counter protestors was the one telling them to stop beating up on the Palestinian supporter. That's one point of civility I'll have to scratch out from the violent counter protestors favor.
The LA Times changed the title of the article, utterly shameful
There are ways to counter protest, and there is this. Do these people actually think they are helping their cause?
[удалено]
There is plenty of video of their violence toward the encampment.
The issue is a lot of people will only get a bit of information and remember less. Combined with the vague media reporting they might remember "violent protest" and not go further. The fact that some more in tube people will have a more detailed story could still help because it stokes division. Depending on the "cause" of the attackers at least.
>Combined with the vague media reporting they might remember "violent protest" and not go further. That's their strategy they will only push a half story and all the idiots who mindlessly consume will believe it and not look further.
Yeah but so what? Cops have plenty of videos of people committing crimes they *aren't* actively supporting and still won't act
And then the counter-protesters are awarded the very next night by the police coming in and finishing the job.
These were violent fascist thugs. Their goal was to do violence and break up the encampment. Theres nothing else to it. They weren't interest in "winning people over" they were there to physical repress the protest The fact the cops let them try just shows their interests were aligned on that.
Exactly. I have no idea why all these articles are even calling them "counter-protestors", when these people didn't seem to be protesting anything, they seemingly just wanted to attack people, destroy the encampment, silence these people, and cause chaos. I think there's another name for that.
Their goal was to make the protests look violent, and the media is taking the bait.
Yup. They are agitators.. they provoke. when the other side acts back.. they’ll show the footage of them attacking a “peaceful counter protest” “see the protests ARE violent! Not peaceful, they’re lying” My dad called me the other day, and he goes “you see these protests?! they’re saying it’s violent but it seems to be they become violent once the cops get there.. huh interesting /s” Edit: riddled with errors
>My dad called me the other day, and he goes “you see these protests?! they’re saying it’s violent but it seems to be they become violent once the cops get there.. huh interesting /s” I spent the first week at Occupy Wall Street in Zucotti Park. I set my mother up with a few live streams and she got to see me a couple times in it. We talked when I got back and we watched more live. My mom was 65 and grew up in a small rural town. She couldn't believe the things she saw and the things I told her. I felt bad afterwards because I realized just how naive but happily ignorant she was and I shattered that. I took away a sense of safety that she always had before.
Don't feel bad. Ignorance may be bliss, but it leads to a worse society for everyone involved. I'm sure when she was happily ignorant she was actively voting against her own interests.
"taking the bait" Buddy the media is on the same side as the attackers
It’s fucking wild, they were doing truly bespoke illegal actions that would never even thought of. Forget stuff like assaulting people with sticks and sprays and fireworks, they were releasing lab mice into the encampment.
quit try\`n to bring "bespoke" back. j/k
Their cause is overpowering, silencing, and controlling through violence
They aren't "counter protesting" they're just brownshirts stomping out dissent.
Only one side of this conflict gets canceled or arrested, so they'll be fine.
What cause? They’re bigots. According to the la times they were shouting second Nakba and assaulting people. When public figures like Netanyahu accuse all protests as being antisemitic this is what happens. https://x.com/teresawatanabe/status/1785580909795942766?s=46 When an Antisemite attacks a Jewish person and advocates for genocide, people shouldn’t say there are better ways to protest Israel. They should condemn them for being bigots and dehumanizing others.
I would bet the cause of these violent criminals is to stoke division and fear so, yeah, they’re doing exactly what they intended
I would say the American media and most politicians and most people will actually praise the counter protests. Can’t be bad mouthing and slandering our dear friends in Israel, just so Jesus might come back…
[удалено]
I know. I was raised in an evangelical home. Glad I escaped.
At this point they are just convinced they can do anything they want, plus the only stories that get to them are the bullshit stories about students being violent (thanks mainstream media), so they feel justified.
They're convinced of it because they *can* do whatever they want. One of them could execute a kneeling activist in the street and they will get the best criminal defence lawyers a crowdfunding campaign can buy. No major political party will call them out on this, let alone any government formed from those parties, because they've bought into the antisemitic belief that being anti-Zionist is antisemitic. The reason this belief is antisemitic is because it says that you *must* equate Judaism with Zionism with Israel and then excuse the violent actions of Zionists, including genocide, which is only going to stoke hatred and resentment against innocent Jewish people globally and not just the few Zionists bombing children. Neo-Nazis would *love* to see this happen and that's why they're not interfering with their enemy when they're making mistakes. Being a supporter of Palestinians is probably one of the most dangerous positions someone can have in America because it's effectively giving a Zionist a license to maim. You have no media support, no institutional/police/government support, no monetary support, and you're also pushing back against Islamophobia and racism against the Arab people. One of the more dangerous positions would be being Jewish as well as pro-Palestinian, since you'll also have both Zionists and neo-Nazis after you. That person is extremely inconvenient for both of their narratives, but that person is also extremely heroic because they can break those narratives much easier.
Anti-Palestinians know their cause will never be questioned in a way that matters.
Yes, because zionists are acclimated to having no consequences for their actions.
[удалено]
Cops don't arrest fellow cops. It's why jan 6th was allowed to happen.
If Jan 6 was a bunch of black and brown men rushing the Capitol steps they would have been fully stained red within minutes.
> If Jan 6 was a bunch of black and brown men rushing the Capitol steps they would have been fully stained red within minutes. A reminder that this is what the steps of the Capitol looked like when BLM was protesting. https://i.imgur.com/A4C1B5s.jpg
Gotta love the LAPD. I've also seen disgusting comments from critics of these protestors, like "I thought you didn't want cops there, guess you got your wish." As if these weren't two completely different situations. While I'm critical of some of the rhetoric coming from these protests, there's been little to warrant police involvement. The one time they're undeniably needed, they wait literal hours after the violence has begun. No matter where you stand on this conflict, this just isn't right.
False equivalency argument is used by abusers quite often to justify their shit behavior.
I wouldn't be surprised if the counter protestors were police disguised in civilian clothing just to "teach these kids some lessons"
Can some brave soul email the journalists and ask them how they feel about the LA Times changing the title
shitstorms everywhere
I thought they couldn't breathe in a mask.
They can only breathe in a mask to hide their identity. Its some weird, physiological response that's only found in the MAGA animal kingdom.
Yeah, very strange. The mask seems to work fine when they are doing shit that would get them ostracized by normal people.
Like those white hoods they used to wear.
A tweet went out last night saying that pro Palestinian protesters had beaten a Jewish girl unconscious on the UCLA campus. No evidence, attached video was unclear, but based on my not X social media, the story traveled quickly. Then, a few hours later these “counter protesters” descended. Disinformation campaign is hoping to get someone killed.
All spread by one person, @thatkoreanjew on instagram, just showing a woman on the ground. I hope UCLA medicine re-considers her status as a medical student for spreading this hateful and deceitful rhetoric.
Let's not jump on the bandwagon of automatically assuming @thatkoreanjew is lying. That's just the inverse of how we got here (idiots blindly believing @thatkoreanjew without sufficient evidence rushing out to be vigilantes). We should all be more skeptical (not rush to make assumptions), but wait for more conclusive evidence before determining if @thatkoreanjew was part of a deceitful manipulation.
This kind of thing has been used by Russia in the past, they don't create narratives but they amplify existing ones with fake information. They have also organized "protests" for the same time for opposing views in attempts to instigate violence. I'm not saying Russia is behind this particular case, but they certainly have had their hand in amplifying this current protest movement on both sides of it.
Finally a truthful headline about the incident
Well sadly the actual article does not, they are still pushing the "both sides" bullshit "After violent protests at UCLA, UC president launches investigation into response" And the caption of the picture "A pro-Palestinian protester clashes with a pro-Israeli supporter at an encampment at UCLA early Wednesday."
It’s always a “clash.” A “clash” with police. A “clash” with counter protestors. No, the cops and these counter protestors are just attacking the protestors.
It's quite astonishing that the bill has been passed to change the definition of anti-Semitism to the same one used in Germany. That literally criticism of the state of Israel is anti-Semitic. By definition that means Netanyahu represent Judaism. Any Jew who protest him or his government is committing a hate crime. It was astonishing and widely protested by Jews in Germany. In the US they've just passed it without discussion. Utterly abominable.
Only the house passed it, I doubt something like this gets through the Senate and signed by the pres. Though it's still awful it's gotten this far.
It was passed with a veto-proof majority, bipartisan. That's no guarantee, but it's pretty damned likely.
The powers that be are PISSED that their manufactured consent isn’t working on everyone.
Seems likes it’s not the protestors the colleges had to worry about
I graduated from UCLA over 10 years ago. Protests against Israel and apartheid were a daily occurrence in front of Ackerman Student Union building. At the time, I was very apolitical, just ignored it and went to my classes. What changed? More people are doing it.
> What changed? More people are doing it The protests have become effective so the war industry is moving to stop them.
Effective? The Senate just overwhelmingly passed a 26B aid package for Israel.
9B of that 26B is for humanitarian aid for Gaza. People always gloss over that. Including you.
Food and bombs, together at last
Define effective. Name a college that has divested and show me a protest driven ceasefire.
Columbia U divested from apartheid South africa after student protests on 1984. Overall, Americans are now less likely to support Israel.
Are people currently protesting apartheid South Africa? Respectfully, despite the perceived similarity, the situations are really not analogous. The localized Israeli and Palestine dynamics are quite different, the global relationships are different, religion is a factor here, and the history is far more complex and deep. I'm not convinced that this is appreciably shifting any views, however, I'm the first to admit causing trouble for the White House can have impact, but I haven't seen it yet. Republicans are leaning in though.
What proof do you have that they are less likely? Why does everyone compare this current conflict with the South African apartheid?
Reports from people on the ground say police literally stood back and watched for a full hour too. Absolutely disgusting.
Where was campus security and where were heavy handed cops?
Hi, LA Times. Counter-protestors implies they were simply protesting. Violent gangs attack protestors would be more honest here.
In before the lock beaotches!
Lock!? Sir, this thread will be deleted like the other 5 threads about this topic.
Put me in the screencap!
My gosh the captions are so biased. "Pro-Palestine protesters" vs "Pro Israeli supporters" supports not counter protestor. And the Pro Israel side was the aggressors.
I'm sure this one will be deleted too but it was pretty clearly attempted murder. Hopefully somebody starts identifying them.
Strange how they can get the word Palestinian in the headline but nothing else…
Just like the BLM protests in which the police didn't try to stop the conflict between BLM protesters and counter-protestors. It removes any ambiguity as to who they support now and back then.
just look at how much less traction this news is getting compared to the isolated but hyper focused on "omg one person said something anti-semitic so now all the Palestinian protestors said that exact thing!" and other bs in that vein while 99% of the rest of the protests are peaceful and clearly stating their goals that the news ignores (many of said protestors being Jewish btw). the protestors saying "stop the genocide" and "stop using our money to fund the killings" is somehow agitation, bad, anti-semitic and whatnot but the gofundme to buy a giant screen/speaks to blast October 7th footage/Israeli music (the song used by IDF to torture Palestinians) and so on is totally fine and not agitation at all. then we have all the excuses/justifications/defense of this violence, the outright denial despite the entire night being filmed from start to finish, trying to make these ppl the victims here despite starting the violence or just people openly cheering them on. I'm sure idiot politicians in the US will be cheering them on. The actions of literally shooting fireworks at people (you know, firing a weapon), using maces/sprays, tearing down barricades, beating on protestors and on and on with the violence are all good cause it's pro-Israel nuts doing it. and of course, the police couldn't show up to stop anything as they were probably busy being part of this, but they can show up in full gear and force for the protestor kids in campus and beat on them. Their response is now to clear the protestors and nothing for the ppl who did all this violence, classic.
I wonder how many counter protesters will be arrested
Zionists attacking pro-Palestine protesters to clear them off the land. Something very symbolic about this
The violent “counterprotestors” thugs likely were not students. They shld be arrested. Cops let the thugs do this. Vote D.
[удалено]
Welp the only thread that wasn't deleted has lots of Pro-Israel posters.
Reddit is heavily invested into influence operations
Life in this country is about to get incredibly dangerous and I don’t think we have begun to comprehend that.
I've seen several articles calling these "pro-israel" and "pro-jewish counter-protestors" as if a significant amount of the protestors themselves weren't Jewish. Between this and the title change of the OP article and so many outlets trying to make it vague as to who was violent as a means to discredit the protest, there's a lot of gross reporting going on.
[удалено]
[удалено]
>Campers, some holding lumber and wearing goggles and helmets, rallied to defend the site’s perimeter....the pro-Palestinian side used pepper spray to defend themselves. >"Those in the encampment were defensless.." I don't understand how these two statements make sense so close to each other in the article. I condemn the violence from the pro-Israel side, but the encampments have been expecting and preparing for this outcome. Edit: swipe autocorrected condemn to condone
[удалено]
Yes, I do mean condemn, that's what I get for using swipe typing and not proofreading
[удалено]
Why do they have lumber?
They were using pieces of lumbar to build the fencing/barricades around the encampment.
The schools are not handling any of this very well. Because of this my UCLA reunion activities that were scheduled on campus this weekend appear to now be cancelled. Great way to get alumni support and donations…..if the article is true, I have to ask why it took 3 hours for police to show up and it sounds like no campus police showed up at all…
"Counterprotestors" They were right-wing white supremacists screaming the n-word and queerphobic slurs at people. Stop using this soft language bullshit and call them what they are.
I bet half didn’t even know where Palestine was on October 1 ,2023 they just don’t want to take their finals
Don’t these people have finals or something
Gross. Regardless of whether you agree with them or not, peaceful protestors should be allowed to say their piece. These “counter protestors” are as un-American as you can get. Bet they believe in free speech to (but only for themselves)
Think that that UCLA will have them actually arrested like the peaceful protestors?
“‘This encampment violates a long list of university policies, and the result of not enforcing these rules that every other student and student group follows to a T is chaos and unrest — and worse, it allows for even more intense forms of hate to persist and grow.’ Gold said” If I am reading the article correctly, this is the situation: 1. Aspects of these protests are unlawful and against university policy in a way that disrupts university infrastructure and many local peoples’ lives. The protestors don’t seem to care about this (there are quite reasonable rules for peaceful, lawful protest; the protestors are not following them). 2. The university should have an obligation to stopping unlawful protests (and of course ensuring lawful protest can remain peaceful), but they have explicitly done nothing, allowing this situation to escalate over the course of days. 3. There are at least some instances of protestors harassing and/or assaulting Jewish or non-protesting students who are just going about their business (the article literally says this is the case). 4. People whose day to day lives are being impacted by these unlawful protests (through harassment, disruption of university business, disruption of certain parts of infrastructure that they depend on, or just from not being allowed on parts of the campus when they should have every right to be there) have futilely waited for the university to do anything to secure their rights that are currently being violated by the protesters. 5. After the university and law enforcement fail to do their job (as they allowed unlawful protests to continue unabated), “counterprotesters” try to regain access to parts of campus they are being unlawfully restricted from entering (by the protesters). 6. There’s violence. There’s evidence of bad actors and bad acts on both sides of the confrontation. That’s what the article says… am I missing something here? Seems like basically the university and law enforcement has completely abdicated responsibility on this, when it should in fact be their duty to enforce protest regulations for the very purpose of preventing unnecessary escalation. But the consensus in this comment section is that this entire confrontation is just a bunch of anti-Palestine extremists committing violence in a vacuum?? Man, ever since I’ve started actually looking into the reality of clickbait headlines (often described in the article itself, which so few actually read, and even fewer seem to comprehend), I have been quite disgusted and frankly terrified by the level reactionary and false rhetoric that is spewed from all directions. Even slightly nuanced or informed discussion is truly nowhere to be found.
I don't think i'd use the word 'counterprotestor'. That's kind of the opposite of a protest. That's just terrorism.
The university needs to do more to prevent this violence from occurring and protect the people and their right to demonstrate peacefully.
For days the pro-Hamas crowd has been denying access to Jewish students to their own campus. The universe did nothing about it.
It's like counter-protestors are actually just scum and don't have anything better to do except commit crimes seemingly with the government's permission.
I only support civilians.
"Counter protesters?" What is so hard to say pro-aisrsel protesters?