When Israel assassinated Palestinian journalist Anas al-Sharif earlier this month, the Reuters news agency ran a report titled: “Israel kills Al Jazeera journalist it says was Hamas leader”. They chose that headline despite the fact al-Sharif used to work for them – he was part of a Reuters team that won a 2024 Pulitzer Prize.
Instances like this caused a backlash online, but also sparked concern among some staff at the influential global newswire, which was founded in London in 1851 and now has a daily audience of more than a billion. Multiple Reuters employees have spoken to Declassified about what they see as pro-Israel bias among the company’s editors and management. All requested anonymity to avoid reprisals. In the email, they also said,“
I’ve attached a report…and an open letter some colleagues and I sent to management in the hopes that Reuters will uphold basic journalistic principles, but I now recognize that senior leadership is unlikely to change, much less stop actively stifling critiques.”
In 1872, Emperor (of Iran) Naser al-Din negotiated a concession with Paul Reuter, a British citizen, granting him control over the roads, telegraphs, mills, factories, extraction of resources, and other public works in exchange for a stipulated sum for five years and 60% of all the net revenue for 20 years. The Reuter concession was met with not only domestic outrage in the form of local protests, but also opposition from the Russian government.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tobacco_Protest
All i can say is search the web for the history of any company youre planning to work for
Reuters: “hey we don’t want to be a target for those journalist murdering bastards.”
I don’t trust a site with a name like that. Sorry.
Real journalism is scary
Misinformation is scary. And I’ve noticed your username before - I only check that when posts are dubious.
You should note down your own username.
Some nerd using an old norse word as a user name demanding to be taken seriously is funny
I don’t demand to be taken seriously. I just know that there is a lot of misinformation out there, and applied my own rule of caution. In this case it was a simple smell test.
I am well aware that my conclusion could be wrong.
Sort of a shallow reason for suspicion - a quick read on Wikipedia about the site doesn’t seem to raise any red flags.
And yet you trust Reuters and their ilk
A name like what? Declassified UK? Why? That sounds like a pretty normal name tbh especially one that is presumably dissident to the current UK government.
Like if it was Fuck You News 420 or something I’d understand, but Declassified UK doesn’t even sound weird or unprofessional.
declassifie duk 😨❌🦆
