Does the Press EVER Get Tired of Being Manipulated?

Greetings from the Left Coast, where we here at Left Coast Blues do the heavy thinking for those who just can't be bothered.

I've noticed that the press coverage of Israel’s retaliation on Hamas has followed the usual pattern: reportage of how this is one of the “bloodiest assaults in decades,” how many bombs were dropped, how many Palestinians have been killed and wounded, how many civilian casualties Palestinian officials claim there have been, quotes from bereaved Palestinians, pictures of the damage in Gaza. Almost as an afterthought, it’s mentioned that the assault began after militants launched 300 rockets into Israel in one week, and that they’ve launched over 3,000 rockets into Israel in the last year.

Were those 3,000 rockets aimed at Israeli military targets? Of course not. They were fired blindly into Israel in the hopes of killing as many Israeli civilians and causing as much damage as possible. And in case you haven’t figured it out yet, Hamas doesn’t care how many civilian casualties they suffer in return. The more the better, because they can use the press coverage to stoke more hatred of Israel. That’s why they locate their rocket batteries in civilian neighborhoods, and turn mosques into ammunition dumps and command centers.

This paragraph from the December 28 Associated Press article is typical:

“The unprecedented assault sparked protests and condemnations throughout the Arab world, and many of Israel’s Western allies urged restraint, though the U.S. blamed Hamas for the fighting.”

See? Once again the U.S. is out of step with the rest of the world – blaming Hamas when everyone else is either urging restraint or howling for more Israeli blood. How dare the Israelis defend themselves by taking such unprecedented action?

Where is the coverage of the damage those 3,000 rockets inflicted on Israel? Where are the pictures of damaged buildings and wounded and grieving Israelis? Why is this only news when Israel gets tired of it and strikes back? And why can’t the press call a terrorist a terrorist instead of a “militant.” Can they honestly not see the bias here? Are they really so clueless that they don’t see how they’re being manipulated? Or do they just not care? Either way, it disgusts me.

Thanks for listening.