Israel/Palestine

riversedge

(73,123 posts) Sun Feb 4, 2024, 01:42 PM Feb 2024

CNN Staffers Accuse Network of Having Pro-Israel Bias

I have to say--most stations seem to lean to Israel reporting. IMHO

Link to tweet

?s=20

CNN Staffers Accuse Network of Having Pro-Israel Bias

https://www.thedailybeast.com/cnn-staffers-accuse-network-of-having-pro-israel-bias?utm_campaign=owned_social&via=twitter_page&utm_medium=socialflow&utm_source=twitter_owned_tdb

Published Feb. 04, 2024 9:33AM EST

David McNew/Newsmakers

CNN staffers despise the network’s approach to covering the Israel-Gaza conflict, telling The Guardian the coverage repeats Israeli propaganda and often skews pro-Israel. Multiple staffers said the network’s editorial process in covering the conflict includes multiple guardrails against the use of material that originates with Hamas, though it offers no such edicts when using Israeli sources or quotes. Staffers felt the framework insinuated that Israel’s actions in Gaza since the Oct. 7 attack were justified, regardless of the destruction caused by Israeli forces. One example provided was the network’s approval process, SecondEyes, which mandates that all coverage on the conflicts be approved by the network’s Jerusalem bureau, allowing for quick clearing of Israeli government statements while Palestinian statements are delayed. Other sources told the paper that reports by the network’s correspondents were often more thorough, though they are mostly relegated to the network’s international broadcasts. A CNN spokesperson told The Guardian: “We absolutely reject the notion that any of our journalists treat Israeli officials differently to other officials.”
Read it at The Guardian

2 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

CNN Staffers Accuse Network of Having Pro-Israel Bias (Original Post) riversedge Feb 2024 OP

CNN RUNS GAZA COVERAGE PAST JERUSALEM TEAM OPERATING UNDER SHADOW OF IDF CENSOR cbabe Feb 2024 #1

Of course the "staffers" remain anonymous, and I suspect those staffers have their own bias. JohnSJ Feb 2024 #2

cbabe

(4,158 posts)

1. CNN RUNS GAZA COVERAGE PAST JERUSALEM TEAM OPERATING UNDER SHADOW OF IDF CENSOR

Reply to riversedge (Original post)

Sun Feb 4, 2024, 02:02 PM

Feb 2024

https://theintercept.com › 2024 › 01 › 04 › cnn-israel-gaza-idf-reporting

CNN Runs Gaza Coverage Past Jerusalem Team Subject to IDF Censor

Jan 4, 2024CNN Runs Gaza Coverage Past Jerusalem Team Operating Under Shadow of IDF Censor. The Jerusalem

JohnSJ

(96,523 posts)

2. Of course the "staffers" remain anonymous, and I suspect those staffers have their own bias.

Reply to riversedge (Original post)

Sun Feb 4, 2024, 02:22 PM

Feb 2024

The coverage I have seen on CNN by their correspondents have not white-washed the situation in Israel's favor.

These anonymous staffers, by the report, seem upset because they are not saying Hamas is a credible source, and accusing CNN of saying the IDF is a credible source.

Not only is that bullshit, but it exposes the probable pro-Hamas bias of those staffers.

Last year there were accusations that there were some embedded journalists who had prior knowledge of the October 7th attack, and I have to wonder who those journalists are?

CNN has been critical, as has other outlets of the number of civilian casualties as a result of the Israeli retaliation.

The article is ambiguous about how many staffers are critical. Was it 5, 10, 100? The article headline makes it seem like everyone on the staff.

Last year a State Department staffer, Josh Paul, who had been there over 10 years, made headlines by resigning because of President Biden's policies toward the middle east, with the media implying that a mass exodus of State Department Staffers would soon follow based on his narrative. CNN, along with other news outlets gave this individual a lot of coverage through interviews and exposure for his views, which were anything but complimentary toward Israel.

These staffers I think have a major bias problem of their own, about a very complicated situation.

Reply to this discussion