this post was submitted on 18 Oct 2023
471 points (92.0% liked)

World News

32323 readers
686 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

"We're seeing the combination of genocidal acts with special intent," said Raz Segal, an Israeli historian.

top 19 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] FUCKRedditMods@lemm.ee 70 points 1 year ago (3 children)

All western news is doing some strong work completely ignoring coverage of this narrative. Absolute fucking disgrace and travesty.

[–] Hyperreality@kbin.social 63 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

You're commenting on a newsweek article, a western news media with a readership of 100 million.

[–] somethingsnappy@lemmy.world 20 points 1 year ago (1 children)

There are not 100 million dentists offices. No way that is their readership.

[–] zero_gravitas@aussie.zone 21 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

They're referring to monthly unique visitors on the Newsweek website. Print circulation was around 100k in 2015. (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newsweek)

For comparison (I make no claims it's a good one), the New York Times web site has around 240 million monthly unique visitors. (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_New_York_Times)

[–] UnknownQuantity@lemm.ee 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Does that include all the visitors blocked by their paywall?

Edit: I'm referring to NYT.

[–] zero_gravitas@aussie.zone 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I only know what I gleaned from quick glance at their Wikipedia page, which says they have 8.6 million digital subscribers. So the 240 million figure includes non-subscribers who can run into paywalls, but I'm guessing the NYT might have some content that isn't paywalled, which complicates getting a sense of their 'reach'. Which is why I said I make no claims that it's a good comparison.

[–] sturmblast@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

and how many of those are bots?

[–] library_napper@monyet.cc 36 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Everything I'm reading is covering the Israeli war crimes and their condemnation from western countries. And it's mostly reporting from the west.

Maybe don't read for-profit journalism?

[–] masquenox@lemmy.ml 8 points 1 year ago

Everything I’m reading is covering the Israeli war crimes and their condemnation

Oh, you mean the slap-on-the-wrist heckling some liberals in the west are emanating? The Israelis must be shaking in their boots.

[–] agressivelyPassive@feddit.de 8 points 1 year ago

It's not a condemnation at all. Look at the wording, it's phrased like whatever happens to the Palestinians is a natural disaster. A flooding or an earthquake.

[–] TimewornTraveler@lemm.ee 67 points 1 year ago (1 children)

you can't genocide if you got genocided, that's the rule, if you disagree you're an antisemite, now please send rockets to children hospital thank you

[–] affiliate@lemmy.world 16 points 1 year ago

1 like = 1 missile

[–] zerfuffle@lemmy.ml 24 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Yes but have you considered that Arabs aren't white?

[–] masquenox@lemmy.ml 9 points 1 year ago

Depends on which arbitrary definition of "white" you are using. I see a lot of white supremacists pretending that Israel can't be white supremacist because either Jewish people "aren't white" and/or Arab people suddenly "are white" - whatever their pretzel-logic demands in the moment, I guess.

[–] UnknownQuantity@lemm.ee 5 points 1 year ago (2 children)

What? Semites aren't white like Semites?

[–] zerfuffle@lemmy.ml 7 points 1 year ago

Honourary white

[–] agressivelyPassive@feddit.de 4 points 1 year ago

"White" is more of an arbitrary label for "guys like us". Italians and Irish were not considered white not so long ago.

[–] Omega_Haxors@lemmy.ml 8 points 1 year ago

Wow what an antisemite /s