this post was submitted on 26 Feb 2024

305 points (100.0% liked)

A Boring Dystopia

12695 readers

193 users here now

Pictures, Videos, Articles showing just how boring it is to live in a dystopic society, or with signs of a dystopic society.

Rules (Subject to Change)

--Be a Decent Human Being

--Posting news articles: include the source name and exact title from article in your post title

--If a picture is just a screenshot of an article, link the article

--If a video's content isn't clear from title, write a short summary so people know what it's about.

--Posts must have something to do with the topic

--Zero tolerance for Racism/Sexism/Ableism/etc.

--No NSFW content

--Abide by the rules of lemmy.world

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

305

NPR is not sure why Aaron Bushnell set himself fire despite it being clearly mentioned in the video. Omit Gaza but mention the hostages taken by Hamas (lemmy.world)

submitted 1 year ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

42 comments fedilink hide all child comments

The article been changed after this went viral.

Screenshots of the original article:

all 46 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] [email protected] 126 points 1 year ago (3 children)

So you're upset because a reporter is checking their information rather than rushing to premature conclusions? The video was taken down by Twitch and could not be immediately verified. Now that it has, the article reads:

Leading up the incident, Bushnell said in the video that he "will no longer be complicit in genocide." Later, as he burned in front of the Israeli Embassy, Bushnell could be seen on the livestream yelling "Free Palestine!"

Waiting a few hours for reliable information is exactly what a good news agency should do. People demanding news that rushes to conclusions regardless of their information is what leads to misinformation.

[–] [email protected] 23 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

For a "rapidly published article" the writers of the article seemingly had the time to include irrelevant details about the flags in front of the israeli embassy symbolizing the hostages taken by Hamas
All the information was available in a two minute video. There is no ambiguity. Even if NPR would not agree with the statements that were made they could have still verbatim quoted them as they are so happy to do for every statement made by the IDF. The video was circulating everywhere online.

[–] [email protected] 40 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

So should we automatically believe every video that circulates online? Basic journalistic standards require verification of any source. As has already been pointed out, the article was updated with the relevant information once it was available and verified. This is common practice among every news source that publishes online.

Journalists have two options in the midst of a developing story. They can rely on rumor and instinct to publish whatever version of the story they think is the truth, and if they get it wrong, update the retraction later. Or they can wait until they have verified information, and report on only what they know. Frankly, I think there are too many sources out there who do the former, and too few who take the latter path.

You're upset over basic journalistic standards and projecting them into something they're not. There's a reason that articles published online list the date/time of the most recent update, not just the time of publication.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago

There were no basic journalistic standards applied. They had full access to the video and quote and knew his exact motivations.

His name was correctly spelled. His motivations "forgotten".

If journalists do not know why they are writing an article they should not write the article.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago

Yeah I almost pulled off the road yesterday to comment on all the “you’ll never hear the media talk about this” as NPR ran a segment on the uncommitted vote for Michigan then went into a report about this incident. Clearly stating the why and intent and what they shouted during even.

[–] [email protected] 72 points 1 year ago (1 children)

An earlier version of the sentence reads (bold mine):

As of Sunday afternoon, NPR was not able to independently verify the man's identity or motives.

Although there were indications that he was a US servicemember (he was wearing a uniform) and likely his identity - as you mentioned, he recorded the video - they were not verified at that time.

Once his Identity was verified, the reporter removed that part of the line. Once his motives were verified, she removed that part of the line as well. This is just how news reporting works.

[–] [email protected] 21 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

No they posted his name so his identity was verified, they were just not sure about his motivations." Let's check that quote

My name is Aaron Bushnell. I am an active-duty member of the US Air Force, and I will no longer be complicit in genocide. I’m about to engage in an extreme act of protest — but compared to what people have been experiencing in Palestine at the hands of their colonizers, it’s not extreme at all. This is what our ruling class has decided will be normal.

Free Palestine

Geez this is all so vague, we only heard his name!

Let's write an article about it not mention anything else from the video!

[–] [email protected] 30 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I mean, him stating a name and his motivations and verifying that it was indeed this man and those were his motives are two different things.

I like journalism that verifies statements. Is there a man by that name and is he deceased? If the answer to those questions had been "no", it would have been an entirely different story.

[–] [email protected] 20 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

He was screaming "Free Palestine" while on fire. On video. A first party source.

There is zero nuance here.

The fact that the last paragraph referenced israeli hostages is the final nail in the coffin fully proving the intentions of this article.

Stop giving these propaganda writers the benefit of the doubt. It's very clear that consent for genocide is being manufactured.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I can scream Free Palestine and announce that I am the Pope while doing so. That doesn't make it true.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago

His motives

[–] [email protected] 17 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Turns out some people aren't terminally online to see every video before it's taken down.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Turns out the video was reposted a gazillion times everywhere after being taken down and it was practically impossible to avoid it.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Actually, I spent about 5 minutes looking for it earlier but then remembered I don't really need to expose myself to it. If it had just popped up in front of me, I'd have seen it.

Maybe you don't use the internet like the average person does, so your experience is different from theirs?

We want journalists to be honest about what they have and haven't verified. And if it hasn't been verified, it's better to be quiet about it, so your quote of "while unverified, we have received some reports of decapitated babies in one of the areas attacked" doesn't turn into "decapitated babies found in areas attacked by Hamas."

And yes, I deliberately chose a recent and relevant example of something that actually happened and was used to justify Israel's response early on.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

You open Mastodon or Twitter, type in his name, and it pops up. Not difficult.

The beheaded babies example is particularly bad because it shows how actual journalistic standards go out of the window when israel makes a claim.

There was no video or picture evidence of the beheaded babies
"Journalists" did quote the claims directly
"Journalists" suddenly had no problem using the words "alleged" or "suspected" to cover themselves during a developing story
Relies on the most well known propaganda source in the world
Manufactures consent for israel. which is why it did reach front page of every single newspaper despite being a lie.

Journalists can't use the "journalistic integrity" cover for everything that is anti-israel while simultaneously barraging us with "IDF says Hamas tunnel network under hospital X" every single day without any evidence.

Let's not forget NPR has been heavily pushing IDF propaganda for the last few months as well, directly pushing the Hamas rape story: Israel demands U.N. investigate charges of sexual violence by Hamas fighters

That is reports of widespread sexual violence in the Hamas attack that started this latest conflict. Israel's ambassador to the United Nations, Gilad Erdan, says the U.N. has been too slow to speak out.

GILAD ERDAN: Sadly, the very international bodies that are supposedly the defenders of all women showed that when it comes to Israelis, indifference is acceptable.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You're cherry-picking stories if that's how you're classifying NPRs coverage. I'm on their site now and searched Gaza...1st 2 stories that come up are about the Michigan voters and the potential cease-fire...makes sense as those are the American-centic stories. Then we get into a story about children starving to death that unequivocally states that Israel tanks were shooting aid trucks and groups of civilians trying to get that aid. Then, a story about a nurse with Doctors without borders who was in one of their shelters when Israel opened fire on them. Again, there is no equivocation.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You are cherry picking stories. Even the newest NPR version of this article is propaganda as it uses the word "war" instead of Genocide at the very top of the article, literally twisting Aarons words and lying.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Would you have been happier if they said "a protest against Israel's 'genocide'"?

They weren't quoting him directly in that first sentence, and regardless of how any of us feel about it personally, the ICC said this isn't genocide. Personally, I also feel it's a genocide, but if I said that in an article I wrote, it would be an opinion piece because, when it comes to committing crimes, the western world has generally agreed on the principle of innocent until proven guilty and we prove that guilt in courts of law.

I noticed you didn't link to the actual article. I'm assuming at this point, based on your posting history and this interaction, that it was a deliberate choice on your part to use a screenshot instead because 4 sentences later, the same article states, "Leadinf up to the incident, Bushnell said in the video that he 'will no longer be complicit in genocide.' Later, as he burned in front of the Israeli Embassy, Bushnell could be seen on the livestream yelling "Free Palestine!"'

Makes it seem like you're not arguing in good faith, which makes me want to disengage with you at this point.

https://www.npr.org/2024/02/25/1233810136/fire-man-israeli-embassy-washington

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Yes.

NPR said that according to Aaron's social media post this is a "war" not a "Genocide" which is a lie.

[–] [email protected] 35 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I suspect "independently" is the critical word here. I guess they aren't willing to take the guy's word for it when he says it's because of Gaza. Probably a sound policy in general when suicide/mental health is in play. The followup investigation will have to determine if his competence was intact, at which point the motive will be "independently verified".

[–] [email protected] 26 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Aaron Bushnell clearly said on video what his reasoning for his self immolation was. There is no possible doubt. He said he refused to be complicit in the Genocide in Gaza and was screaming Free Palestine while on fire.

Yet the NPR article made zero mention of Palestine, Gaza or Genocide but managed to cram in the israeli hostages. You can't make this up.

[–] [email protected] 22 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

It's literally gaslighting by NPR. We can argue it's intentions but I have a word and it's gaslighting when you try and mess with reality on purpose. Thoughts?

[–] [email protected] 33 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I listen to NPR almost every day and I've never heard them shy away from objective reporting on Gaza. If anything they lean towards sympathy with Palestine.

I agree that the omission in this article is probably a technicality because there is only one source of information and that source died soon after setting himself on fire.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 year ago

Well now you have heard them shy away. I'd let that story of yours rest now.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Possibly the reporter who wrote the article and editor sympathises with Israel rather than NPR as a whole. I strongly condemn Hamas and their actions but omitting what the man’s motives for self immolating were when he was very direct and clear about it being an extreme protest against his governments involvement in the genocide against the Palestinian people is fucked. Although it could also be because they don’t want other people to copy him kind of like when they report on mass shooters

[–] [email protected] 23 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Except they did report on it. This is from an early version of the story before they had access to a verified video. This version of the story was only up a couple hours while they were working to verify the information they had.

That's it.

People are really working to make this something that it's not.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

Right or wrong, his protest is an excellent opportunity for propaganda.

[–] [email protected] 20 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

One day later and the current version of the article does not use the word "Genocide" when quoting Aaron's motive, replacing it with "war".

NPR is very intentionally lying about the words used by Aaron Bushnell.

Only far down the article where they know most people will not read, do they actually quote what Aaron really said.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago

That's NPR, always speaking truth to power. 🙄 https://www.npr.org/sections/publiceditor/2009/06/21/105657917/harsh-interrogation-techniques-or-torture

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I feel like it's just bad journalism than boring dystopia tbh.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Government controlled and influenced media messaging was a primary theme in 1984, an iconic dystopian book.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

That's a fair point.