Israeli/Palestinian News Perspective Maddy P by Madelyn Paolino

Citation:

27mpaolino — 2024-05-08 17:11:34 UTC

Horovitz, David. “Sinister Hamas terms would let it keep most hostages, win the war, inflame the West Bank.” The Times of Israel, 8 May 2024. https://www.timesofisrael.com/sinister-hamas-deal-would-let-it-keep-most-hostages-win-the-war-inflame-the-west-bank/. Accessed 12 May 2024.

Perspective/Bias:

27mpaolino — 2024-05-08 17:11:55 UTC

This article provides many bias's, mostly in favor of the Israeli people. The first one noticed was the headline, which used works such as "sinister" and "inflame" and "most hostages". These words make put the Palestinians in a violent light, and tell the reader that what they are doing is something horrid. The word "most" is also used to convey that the majority of the hostages are being kept, which will not benefit Israel. The document itself uses small quote sections which highlight only the information the news source wants the reader to see.

Potential Audience:

27mpaolino — 2024-05-08 17:12:08 UTC

The potential audience of this news source is the Israeli people. It is published towards them in hopes of the citizens seeing the 'violent' things that Hamas and the Palestinians are doing to their home and people.

Argument of the Article:

27mpaolino — 2024-05-08 17:12:23 UTC

The argument of the article is essentially that Palestine and the Hamas are very inconsistent in their claims and promises, specifically regarding the safety and release of Israeli hostages, as well as the ceasefire agreements which go along with them

Citation:

27mpaolino — 2024-05-08 17:12:40 UTC

Greene, Richard Allen et. all. "Israel and Hamas distance themselves from Biden’s optimism on Gaza ceasefire deal." CNN, 27 February 2024, URL. Accessed 13 May 2024.

(again, wont let me paste and copy correctly so I pasted the link and wrote URL in it's place.)

Perspective/Bias:

27mpaolino — 2024-05-08 17:12:48 UTC

The article provides a bias which favors the Palestinians. This is shown through a variety of ways, the most prominent being the title. The title uses stats such as "35,000 Palestinians killed" to show the great number of deaths. The title also states words such as "urges" to make the situation seem like it's desperate and there is not a lot of time to act. Some other examples of this bias being shown are the shortened quotes and the language used. These shortened quotes contain little to no background information and state important information that could be misinterpreted without it. The language used also can sway the argument, word such as "strikes" instead of attacks as an example.

Perspective/Bias:

27mpaolino — 2024-05-08 17:12:51 UTC

The bias of this article is towards both Israel and Palestine, as it is written from an American perspective which shares both sides of the story. The title doesn't specifically shame any group, and states the two countries perspective as the same, through they are on opposing sides. The article itself does not get into any emotional parts of the story, instead simply stating quotes and facts from both sides. The American bias is shortly represented, and only states that the US governments wants to end the war between the two sides.

Potential Audience:

27mpaolino — 2024-05-08 17:13:01 UTC

The potential audience of this article is the Palestinian people. The article shames the Israeli people for treating them in such a way that they have "no safe place", and informs the wider public of the acts that the Israeli's are committing. They do this in ways that are very evident of exaggeration, using the articles language to do so.

Potential Audience:

27mpaolino — 2024-05-08 17:13:04 UTC

The potential audience of this news source is the American people, but it also could be towards the Palestinian people or the Israeli people. The article is written by an US news source, and it's information is purely informational other than the support the US shares towards the idea of ceasefire. Both sides are represented through quotes and idea's provided by their respective government figures, meaning that their is potential for either side to read.

Argument of the Article:

27mpaolino — 2024-05-08 17:13:11 UTC

The argument of this article is that the the attacks from Israel onto Gaza are destroying any chances of survival for the citizens living there, and that an ceasefire is need to prevent permanent and inhumane destruction. The article proves this by announcing high death numbers and the insanity that the citizens who have survived to this point are feeling.

Argument of the Article:

27mpaolino — 2024-05-08 17:13:19 UTC

This article argues that a ceasefire agreement should be created and signed, as it would benefit both Israel and Palestine, as well as the US. It also highlights the current issues in the way of this agreement, the hostage situation for example.

27mpaolino — 2024-05-13 18:44:31 UTC

The consideration of differing perspectives is needed so that both sides opinions can be fully represented, eliminating any misinformation and bias that other sources may spread. Different perspectives carry specific opinions, each being different even in slight ways. For example, the Israeli people paint themself as peace bringers in the arguments of ceasefire and hostages. They state that they are "peace bringers" (Horovitz), and speak mostly on the topic of the hostages taken from them, rather then the hostages that they take themselves. The Palestinian people of the other hand are highlighting the inhumane actions that the Israelis are committing against them, without mentioning what they have committed themselves, similarly to what the Israelis did in their article. The article states specifically that an "immediate humanitarian ceasefire"(Guterres) is needed due to the acts committed against them. This shows their support for the ceasefire, and paints Israel as being the ones who refuse to work with Palestine on implementing it. A final neutral US perspective provides insight from both sides, as well as mentioning their support for peace, but also how hard it is for both sides to agree to ceasefire. The article states that "what’s underpinning the president’s optimism is looking at the broad outlines of a deal that we have put in place through negotiations last week and negotiations that are continuing through this week" (Miller). This quote shows the US perspective on the ceasefire agreements, and how they believe that the issue is negotiations between the two parties. Seeing these three perspectives provides a broad view of the situation. Both sides, as well as a neutral party, have their opinions on the ceasefire situation well represented. This allows for the reader to intake a variety of information, and give a fair and unbiased summary of what really is happening without exaggerations.

Citation:

27mpaolino — 2024-05-14 01:43:45 UTC

"UN chief urges ‘immediate ceasefire’ in Gaza as 35,000 Palestinians killed." Aljazeera, 12 May 2024, URL. Accessed 13 May 2024.

(would not let the link paste in so I just added the words URL in it's place and pasted the link to the thing. There also was not an author. )