Those US citizens are likely of Lebanese origin visiting, or people with something to do there, like journalists or humanitarians. So it'd be a racist fsck you to the former and saying that they are not protected to the latter.
It's not racist to protect Lebanese-Americans from the Israeli war machine and it's abundantly clear from Gaza and the West Bank that no journalists or humanitarian aid workers are protected or in any way safe when the IDF is involved.
Sorry, I know this has nothing to do with the article at hand which is worthy of discussion in it's own right but does anyone know how BBC is considered left centre? There are sources there on the media bias site for the factual reporting rating but in terms of the bias this is all that they had:
These media sources have a slight to moderate liberal bias. They often publish factual information that utilizes loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by appeals to emotion or stereotypes) to favor liberal causes.
...
Overall, we rate the BBC Left-Center biased based on story selection that slightly favors the left.
These two statements don't seem to be in agreement unless I'm misinterpreting something. The actual reason seems to be that the BBC doesn't run stories that the media bias folks feel they should but they give no examples.
It may be true but based on the media bias website I have no reason to believe their rating is in any way accurate.
EDIT: I missed the part further down on the site that goes into more detail onto the bias rating but the sources there say the BBC actually has a slight right bias. There's nothing in there at all about a left bias except they claim the BBC can be overly negative when it comes to Trump, citing one single article titled "Trump: Is the President a Sex Pest?" which investigates some of the allegations against Trump at the time. Maybe I missed something again but I still didn't see it justified sufficiently.
Lemmy just allows random bot that are 7 days old to start auto posting on political post as a self declared fact checker?? I’m probably missing a community announcement but what’s to stop me writing a “fact checker” and loading it up with my biases on particular outlets.
Got it the mod rammed it through despite the announcement thread being full of pushback about MBFC. Good stuff.
Bonus galaxy brained mod reply to pushback:
Overwhelmingly negative? Those are the 24/7 negative users. We do anything: Those guys: THIS IS IS A THREAT TO DEMOCRACY
So you stand alone in that statement. See the post vote score.
They often publish factual information that utilizes loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by appeals to emotion or stereotypes)
Media Bias Fact Check has all the trimmings of a Propaganda Op - what better way to have centralized control of information in the Era of the transnational information access network that's the Internet than to control Trust in the multitude of information sources from all over the World - from some entity deep into the Right side of the political spectrum plus it's based in the US, whose Overtoon Window is already way to the Right than the rest of the World, so you end up with hilarious takes like BBC being Leftwing which is a common belief of Brexiters and other Far Right types in the UK.
(Curiously, the BBC themselves about a decade ago commissioned a study about it by the University of Nottingham and it turns out the BBC is pro-"whatever party is in Government": note that there is no electable leftwing party in Britain since New Labour - currently in Government - is at best Center-Right. Also as a foreigner who lived in Britain for over a decade I can tell you the BBC reeked with nationalism, especially in their coverage of foreign affairs).
And that's without going into the whole pro-Zionist slant of MBFC's "bias" "fact" "checking". I don't know who is funding that operation but it certainly isn't the likes of the ACLU.
That it is being given very special treatment by some mods in "World News" is very interesting.