You're viewing a single thread.
'Western' media is known in the outside world to report the horrific truth AFTER a war has ended. Or they just wait until enough people make a stink about it, look at Ukraine in their second war.
Just look at what happened in the Bosnian war, Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, Qatar, Africa, Asia... And the atrocities committed there were systematically underreported. Sure, they'll write a few uninspired paragraphs about it and move on.
I'm not saying Eastern media isn't biased, they report more emotional so you have to filter that out. And it's an active war, so they might get some misinformation. But over the years they proved to be more often than not right after everything's done. (Looking at you Srebrenica and all the US wars).
Then the Western media swoops in and makes some documentaries about facts most people with a satellite dish or a second language already knew. Thoughts and Prayers.
After the Ukrainian war started this changed. It's the first time everybody and their mother can follow the war while it's happening.
Now it's happening again in Gaza, but journalists are getting killed en masse because the other side knows about it.
I really recommend everyone to read and watch different sources from different countries/languages and make up their own mind. There's Google translate if you can't speak several languages.
I don't know what news you read but what you're saying is wrong - there definitely has been extensive news coverage on all the wars and conflicts you mentioned, it's just a matter of reading them.
For christ sake Bosnian war was ended by the west when the public pressure to stop a literal genocide grew too large, the massacre of Srebrenica being a massive catalyst to it. How "eastern media" was suddenly more right about it than western sources who actually were there is a point I either misunderstand or, more likely, you don't know what you're talking about.
Also calling eastern media "more emotional" has that little subtle bit of racism, really putting the irony as the icing on this horrible comment.
There are many reasons to read all media with the assumption that it is biased but this isn't it.
Also calling eastern media "more emotional" has that little subtle bit of racism, really putting the irony as the icing on this horrible comment.
Yup. Calling Eastern media emotional when Western media is just as bad with sensationalism, especially American news.
Yeah idk. It's just that calling someone "emotional" is very belittling. oh those palestinians seem very emotional about the whole hospital oopsie-woopsie
the first time everybody and their mother can follow the war while it’s happening
You're thinking of the Gulf War. The invasion of Iraq was literally televised (almost) live everywhere on the world. Vietnam also had an extremely high reporting rate which contributed to the anti-war protests and movement in the US and the eventual withdrawal.
Also, targeting journalist to kill them is an old-time tradition amongst war criminals ever since the journalist profession was defined in the like XVII century.