There was once a time when the brave souls who sat at the editorial desks of our vaunted news services existed for the purpose of ensuring that the information presented to We, The Consumers was truthful. A part of this vetting was to ensure that the language used in news articles, captions, and other information presented to the reader was generally fair, and free of emotional language that would bias the presentation of the news in any way.
Of course, there were always times in which news agencies would "slant" the news a certain way: The American media was wholeheartedly behind our Government's purpose in fighting World War II, and made a point to let the news read as such. "We" gained victories, "We" conquered "evildoers," et cetera.
Sadly for us, editors in modern times are either not paying attention to the content they are sending across, or they are actively working against Western societies—For instance, fighting for the cause of vapid and undefinable (but clearly anti-Western) terms as "social justice." Case in point:
I've underlined all of the emotional terms in the caption to illustrate my point—The Associated Press is presenting the Palestinian side of this situation, using loaded terms to paint the IDF patrol as heartless aggressors. No consideration is given to the fact that Israeli is attempting to round up known and self-admitted murderers. There's no balance provided, we're basically being told by the AP to think that Israel is the aggressor, and all Palestinians are innocent.
Nothing, of course, could be further from the truth, and every tale of woe that our clueless wire services pass on is not founded in reality—but hey, they can't be bothered with little things like that. They're too busy "fighting" for "justice"—and whatever the heck that means, I can assure you that it will not be "just" towards Israel.
No, being a part of the evil and much-maligned West, our "caring" and "tolerant" wire services are compelled to condemn Israel to her fate.As a final aside, if you're wondering how I think this should be captioned, it would probably be something like this, which states all of the known facts without dwelling into the no-longer-news realm of vapid emotionalism:
A Palestinian medic is searched by Israeli soldiers in Nablus, Saturday, Jan. 5, 2008. The city is on its 4th day of an Israeli-imposed curfew, as soldiers search the area for known terrorists, who have claimed credit for a number of recent rockets launched against Israeli cities.
And if this were Ye Olden Days, when our press wasn't so afraid to take our side, it probably would have sounded something like this:
An Israeli soldier checks that a Palestinian medic is not carrying yet another suicide bomb, in the Palestinian-occupied city of Shechem. The Israeli Defence Forces have imposed a curfew on the area, protecting Israeli citizens from even more hostile rocket attacks, while they search door-to-door for the terrorists responsible for the recent attacks. While the curfew has caused some discomfort in Shechem, it has thankfully provided something of a respite to the residents of nearby Israeli cities.
It still sounds a bit too fair to me—Maybe I should've included a sentence or two about how the Palestinians like to drink Jewish blood, or steal Christian babies.
Ah, to be a propagandist for a day.
Comments:
If this had been WW2, then this would have been 180 degrees around to the point of being fair or at least anti-evil-doers.
But now, evil-doers toward democracies are touted as saviors.
I think your third *edit* was a bit much with your second being close to just stating the facts without embellishing anything.
Would you say that it was the Korean and Vietnam battles that changed photo-journalism? Where previous to this it was just reporting the facts of what was going on?
I guess they just can't harp enough over the suffering of the poor Palestinians at the hands of those evil Jooos. How dare those IDF bastards defend their fellow citizens! It is a Palestinians allah-given right to kill Jews, and Israel just will not co-operate!