How a BRICS trio is staring down Israel [Pepe Escobar | AUG 15, 2024 | thecradle.co]
(thecradle.co)
from jimmydoreisalefty@lemmy.world to world@lemmy.world on 20 Aug 2024 09:04
https://lemmy.world/post/18851613
from jimmydoreisalefty@lemmy.world to world@lemmy.world on 20 Aug 2024 09:04
https://lemmy.world/post/18851613
While Israel increasingly isolates itself on the international stage, BRICS members Iran, Russia, and China are quietly coordinating a full-spectrum effort to support Palestine diplomatically and militarily.
#world
threaded - newest
The Cradle - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)
Information for The Cradle:
> MBFC: Left - Credibility: Medium - Factual Reporting: Mixed - United States of America
> Wikipedia about this source
Search topics on Ground.News
https://thecradle.co/articles/how-a-brics-trio-is-staring-down-israel
thecradle.co
Media Bias Fact Check | bot support
MBFC uses non-partisan fact-checking institutions to bolster their credibility, while holding none of the standards. Then they use that laundered credibility to gatekeep minority and politically inconvenient voices.
<img alt="" src="https://slrpnk.net/pictrs/image/ab6b6140-02ec-41f7-8950-a5baf69e1ecf.png">
It should be noted that despite no non-partisan fact checkers are listed on MBFC’s site as raising concerns about the The Cradle’s credibility, Dave M. Van Zandt has arbitrarily placed it in the “Factual Reporting: Mixed” and “Credibility: Medium” categories. One of the concerns he posits is The Cradle’s ‘lack of transparency,’ but the weird right-wing guy who decides these ratings also lacks any transparency himself in the method he used to come to that conclusion.
Fact checking should increase media literacy and identify bad actors that fabricate news, not justify the destruction of a diverse and healthy media environment.
More forever wars.
Quick search:
apnews.com/…/israel-gaza-20-billion-weapons-us-ai…
Reported as a “Low Quality Source”, so I looked at it thinking “Probably another one of those blog sites, sounds like a blog site…”
MBFC’s big beef appears to be “lack of transparency”. There are no failed fact checks in the last 5 years so I’m allowing it for now.
If it turns out later to be funded by, I dunno, Idi Amin or somebody later on down the line, we’ll remove it. But I don’t see “lack of transparency” ALONE as a reason to remove it.
While I think this specific journalist is a piece of shit, I applaud your restraint.
It looks like the big beef with this author is possible Russian contamination:
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pepe_Escobar
“Escobar’s work has been scrutinized for its appearance in outlets identified by the U.S. State Department as part of Russia’s disinformation network, such as RT and Sputnik News, raising questions about the potential propagation of Russian propaganda.”
The main thing that tipped me off this guy was not to be respected was this line from an article someone pointed out to me:
Tucker Carlson has been legally demonstrated in court to be not a serious journalist. His interview with Putin was widely panned by experts to be a farce, specifically and especially Putin’s nebulous claims about Ukraine belonging to Russia and Tucker’s uncritical reception of those claims.
Pepe’s uncritical endorsement of Tucker’s journalism and Putin’s claims deserve ridicule.
Yeah, but that falls right in line with the Russian propaganda angle.
edit: improved format a bit
Owner-class media bias/fact check does not see it as “Low Quality Source” though, so they are more false reports to continue censorship.
Detailed Report:
Yeah, and the only reason they’re marked “medium credibility” is the lack of transparency. There’s no issue with factual reporting.
Pepe Escobar is a defender of Putin’s colonization of Ukraine. His participation in a source where the main thrust of their reporting has been against the genocide of Palestinians undermines their message when he’s not also critical of the ethnic cleansing of eastern Ukraine and the kidnapping of Ukrainian children into Russia.