@mozz
Thanks Israel! Now I know which news network still deliver unbiased news.

Dude Al Jazeera's fuckin fantastic

It is quite literally the only news I'm aware of which is (1) fairly big and professional, competent (2) not automatically pro-Western on everything (3) not run by some government, and filled with stories about how that government's great and any bad stories about it are evil lies

Uhm… This is a joke, right?

Al Jazeera is the Qatari government. The stateargely responsible for the funding of Hamas, and the believed home of Hamas leadership.

I can’t imagine this comment you made was done in good faith. Or are you that ignorant?

Innuendo Studios calls this The Ship of Theseus -- taking individual half-truths and stringing them together into a long line to construct an aggregate statement that bears no resemblance to the truth.

Al Jazeera is the Qatari government.

* partly owned by the Qatari government

The stateargely responsible for the funding of Hamas

* responsible for maybe a third of the funding of Hamas ever since it was given the blessing of the Netanyahu government to do so

the believed home of Hamas leadership.

Not seeing the connection. "Some of Hamas's horrible and corrupt leaders live in Qatar, therefore a news outlet funded partly by the government of Qatar is obviously compromised." I mean, Jared Kushner lives in Florida. Does that mean something about the Miami Herald (or would it, if DeSantis was partially funding it)?

I don't think it's a secret that Al Jazeera has a generally pro-Arab and anti-Israeli viewpoint. I said they were fuckin fantastic and listed some reasons; I didn't say they were totally free from bias / free from having a viewpoint. But even their stories directly on the Gaza war (the most slanted selection of stuff you'll be able to find) are actually pretty factual to me. An example is this story about the Hamas rape claims. It's a little slanted. I don't agree with "while isolated rapes may have taken place, there was insufficient evidence to support allegations that rape had been 'widespread and systematic'." But, it acknowledges sexual violence and human rights violations by Hamas. That puts it absolutely well and clear above the quality of a lot of Israeli media from the mirror-image side, and actually more anti-Hamas than even a lot of the Western press on the same story, which for some reason made the whole focus of the story into the New York Times reporting "false stories," without also making it clear that yes, there was definitely sexual violence, that part is undeniably true even if some specific stories were false.

Do you know of any really severely slanted / dishonest coverage by Al Jazeera? Stories where Israel are involved, and not bothering to report anything about Jared Kushner, are the only examples I'm really aware of. Other than that kind of thing I think of it as generally excellent quality.

I don't agree with "while isolated rapes may have taken place, there was insufficient evidence to support allegations that rape had been 'widespread and systematic'."

I mean it turned that that there was no widespread and systematic rape no?

I read part of the UN report; I would describe what they reported as "widespread." Especially since they lay out a lot of the factors that would prevent them finding out about any given instance where it happened and they still found a bunch of instances.