• xad@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    38
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    It really is a choice to claim someone said something which they did not actually say at all.

    Saying “they said x and I think they meant y” is entirely different from claiming “they said y” while knowing they in fact said x.

    This is not controversial. Interpretations are fine, actively crafting disinformation is not.

    • SoleInvictus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      12
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      That was her mistake - the comment was too vague, so the media jumped on it, skewed the narrative, took that skewed narrative and grossly exaggerated it further, and denounced her as pro-Hamas. It’s obvious to see with even a little bit of reading and it’s both frightening and disgusting.

      • atetulo@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Uhh, no. It was not her mistake that biased media outlets with an agenda say she said something while not actually reporting the exact thing she said.

        It’s bad journalism, but I don’t think anyone expects reputable journalists to take this matter seriously.

      • jj4211@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        No, that one comment was not vague, the only active “fighters” to be called “freedom fighters” were Hamas.

        There is no ambiguity, no vagueness.

        • SoleInvictus@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          There is absolutely ambiguity, it just doesn’t suit your worldview (or similar) so you lie. It’s your right to lie, but just know that anyone who isn’t dogmatic knows you’re lying.