Talk:Gaza Now

Semi-protected edit request on 11 December 2023

Gaza Now is an independent news agency, not affiliated with any political party or organization. Medaminech (talk) 02:42, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: see cited sources Cannolis (talk) 02:46, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

The cited sources do NOT consistently support this characterization.

The first two (Al Jazeera and NPR) merely report that Apple responded to demands of the pro-Israel Zachor Legal Institute which claimed that Gaza Now was Hamas affiliated.

The Washington Post uses the weasel phrase "Hamas linked" which doesn't indicate the character of the alleged linkage, while only the Israeli tech site CTECH describes Gaza Now as a "channel of Hamas" with no evidence offered to support the assertion.

The CTECH article is essentially a sympathetic article about the Israeli State Attorney's efforts to get content removed from social media sites.

In other words the only sources cited in the articles claiming that Gaza Now is Hamas affiliated is the Israeli State Attorney's office and the Zachor Legal Institute, both of which have a clear interest in shutting down unfavorable reporting on the actions of the IDF in Gaza. So, 3 out of 4 of the cited sources do NOT clearly describe Gaza Now as Hamas affiliated, while the 1 that does is relying on the characterization of a highly interested party.

A more accurate characterization of Gaza Now would read:

"Gaza Now is a Palestinian media source that describes itself as independent. It has been characterized by Israeli-aligned sources as affiliated with Hamas." 69.125.145.221 (talk) 20:14, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

We don't post how organizations describe themselves- they have a website and social media to do that. We also don't qualify sources as "Israeli-aligned" unless they either admit that themselves, or most independent sources describe them that way. If you have evidence that these sources do not adhere to basic standards of journalism or are so biased that they make things up, you can challenge their reliability at the reliable sources noticeboard. 331dot (talk) 20:24, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

Three of the four sources cited DON'T themselves characterize Gaza Now as "Hamas-affiliated." You are misrepresenting what those sources actually say.

I think the presumably deliberate decision of Al Jazeera, NPR, and even The Washington Post NOT to use that terminology should be given greater weight than CTECH's characterization, which, while unsourced, appears to simply echo the assertions of the Israeli State Attorney.

I haven't said anything here about the reliability of Al Jazeera, NPR, or The Washington Post. I do question the unbiased character of CTECH's reporting on THIS ISSUE, but my challenge to your characterization does not rely on a challenge to CTECH's reliability. Rather it is based on the BALANCE of the sources cited which does not support the "Hamas-affiliated" characterization. Only one makes the claim that Gaza Now is Hamas affiliated and it happens to be the only one I (and presumably most everybody else) had never heard of before they clicked through the notes here. 69.125.145.221 (talk) 20:57, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

Al-Jazeera clearly identifies this organization as Hamas-linked(surely Al-Jazeera isn't pro-Israel) and a link is an affiliation. Would changing it to "Hamas-linked" be an improvement? 331dot (talk) 21:26, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

You are being sloppy. This is what Al Jazeera actually says:

"Gaza Now – which is described as “Hamas-aligned” by the Atlantic Council – went from 343,506 subscribers to nearly 1.9 million."

Al Jazeera isn't claiming that Gaza Now is Hamas aligned. It is saying that the Atlantic Council has characterized it as such. Also "aligned" isn't the same as "affiliated." It's another weasel word that insinuates affiliation but avoids making the direct allegation.

Look, there is no question that Gaza Now is, like most Palestinians in Gaza, broadly sympathetic to the Palestinian armed resistance as it describes itself, but there is nothing in their reporting that suggests that they are specifically aligned, much less affiliated with, Hamas, rather than any other organization (Islamic Jihad, PFLP, DFLP or smaller outfits). They basically act as an aggregator reposting and digesting content from a wide range of sources including the Al Qassam Brigades (Hamas), Islamic Jihad, but also Haaretz, the WHO, etc..., but also original reporting from on the ground in Gaza I don't see them reposting stuff from the left-wing secular PFLP or DFLP, but that could just be a function of the fact that those groups aren't posting as much useful information.

What seems clear to me is that some Israel-aligned actors have CLAIMED that Gaza Now is Hamas-affiliated, but that the big news organizations reporting on this story are being careful NOT to make that claim themselves because it is actually unsubstantiated.

Also, you can make donations to Gaza Now via SWIFT. They publicly post their routing number. The founder lives in Austria. If there was real evidence that Gaza Now was affiliated with Hamas, you can be certain that SWIFT would shut that down quick.

The critical point here is that the three heavy-weight sources don't support a specific characterization of any relationship between Gaza Now and Hamas.

Finally, it is important to understand what you are doing when you post a characterization like this on Wikipedia on such shaky grounds. You are putting a target on the backs of actual working journalists in a war zone. The IDF has already killed a large number of journalists and in some cases their families in Gaza and according to Haaretz they are very knowledgeable about who they are hitting when. 69.125.145.221 (talk) 22:36, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

We must be reading different stories because Al-J leads off with "Telegram, the encrypted messaging app, has quietly restricted access to several channels affiliated with the Palestinian armed group Hamas.

Hamas’s official account, the account of its armed wing the Qassam Brigades, and the news account Gaza Now".

Holding me personally responsible for the deaths or danger of journalists is beyond the pale. Since we are talking past each other now I see no further point in discussing this with you. If you get a consensus for your edit, it will be implemented. 331dot (talk) 23:43, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

I stand corrected. I apologize. Something very much does not smell right about this, but you are correct with respect to the AJ story which definitely alters the balance of the cited sources. I withdraw my objection.

For information purposes only, here is what Gaza Now has pinned on their Telegram channel:

"Gaza Now" responds to Wikipedia and all Western and American media outlets that are trying to falsify the facts and publish incorrect information about them.

"Gaza Now" is a completely independent media network, and is not affiliated with any political party.

Since its establishment in 2007, "Gaza Now News Agency" has been committed to publishing news around the clock in both Arabic and English. They also translate news from Hebrew into both Arabic and English. It is considered one of the most visited websites in the Palestinian territories, with three million monthly visitors.

As the primary source in Palestine for delivering news impartially, "Gaza Now News Agency" has become the first choice for information for a large number of Palestinians inside and outside Palestine. Its global readership is continuously growing, attracting the attention of many international news agencies regarding Palestinian affairs.

"Gaza Now News Agency" is a non-profit media organization established in 2007 with the goal of promoting independent media in Palestine, establishing relations with local, regional, and international media, and enhancing freedom of speech and media diversity as essential elements to promote democracy and human rights. "Gaza Now" is a collective entity that includes a number of independent journalists from various parts of Palestine. In addition to the news agency, "Gaza Now" is active on social media with a Facebook page that has over one and Six million followers and a Twitter account, as well as a dedicated YouTube channel , and The Gaza Now channel on Telegram, which has nearly 2 million followers, is the largest channel in the Middle East..

"Gaza Now News Agency" delivers its news reports professionally to local and global readers. It provides special features, investigative journalism, news analysis, and articles contributed by a select group of writers. The agency aims for the utmost neutrality in its news policy, facilitating information access, and promoting freedom of expression and media pluralism in Palestine. Through its English-language page, "Gaza Now News Agency" strives to provide the global audience with insights into various aspects of life in Palestine, while also providing a platform for Palestinians to address the international community.

The agency covers political, economic, cultural, and sports news from all West Bank provinces, the Gaza Strip, and the occupied areas within the Green Line, in addition to the latest developments in the Israeli context. It offers translations of excerpts from Hebrew press to present them in Arabic to its readers. It provides literary articles and distinctive investigations on a wide range of topics, from prisoner issues to projects aiming to develop the economy. To provide comprehensive coverage, "Gaza Now News Agency" maintains contact with qualified correspondents and photographers in major cities across Palestine who work in coordination with editors, translators, and other teams at the agency's main offices in Gaza City and nationwide.

In line with the public's desire to stay updated on the latest news in Palestine, "Gaza Now News Agency" sends SMS messages through social media platforms like Twitter, containing urgent news to its subscribers on their mobile phones, in both Arabic and English, covering political, social, economic, and sports news. "Gaza Now News Agency" provides this service to Palestinian mobile network users, allowing them to stay informed about the latest developments

The founder of Gaza Now is: Mustafa Ayash, an independent activist.

The Israeli occupation killed his family after bombing his father’s house on November 22, 2023 in Nuseirat, central Gaza. His parents, mother, and father were martyred, in addition to his sisters, their husbands, brothers, wives, and children. 69.125.145.221 (talk) 01:14, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia does not allow sources from social sites. When Gaza Now will reject the allegation on their website (if they do it), it can be edited. But before this, it is not possible. Showib Ahmmed (talk) 11:15, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

semi-protected edit request on 11 December 2023

"Gaza Now" confirms that it is completely independent, that it is not affiliated with any party, and that it works to convey the truth in Palestine and what the people of Gaza are suffering from. 41.238.53.221 (talk) 03:59, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

i agree, and it is a neutral source of on ground up to date news, and i have never seen it publish hate messages or false news Aiman.elsayed (talk) 04:28, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

100% 84.59.73.205 (talk) 11:27, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 11 December 2023 (2)

This page is providing false information as Gaza now is an independent source which represent the Gazan people and is not affiliated to any particular group’s ideology or politics. If you pride yourself on providing the correct information then it should be removed from this article that Gaza Now is an Hamas affiliated group 92.1.181.88 (talk) 06:34, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Cannolis (talk) 06:50, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

We only claim that the information here is verifiable; while Wikipedia strives for accuracy, we make no guarantees, see Wikipedia:General disclaimer. 331dot (talk) 10:46, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

Gazanow is not affiliated to Hamas

Gaza has now announced on its official Telegram channel that it is an independent media outlet that is not affiliated with Hamas or any party or group. Source: https://t.me/gazaalannet/47671

Volkovsami (talk) 10:41, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

They can say whatever they want- do independent reliable sources state that? 331dot (talk) 10:43, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

misinformation

Gazanow is an independent Palestinian media that does not belong to any party. This is from one of its official sources: https://twitter.com/nowgnna/status/1734007074630041953?s=19 Sandy376 (talk) 10:55, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

Sandy376 This page is being flooded with these comments- as I asked above, do any independent reliable sources state this? They can say whatever they want about themselves. 331dot (talk) 11:05, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia is a free encyclopedia that is not affiliated with any party and does not support any party or country. Therefore, information must be transferred from its sources first, and the official source here is Gaza Now, and if you want to add independent sources, you can point to that. What is more correct here is to say that Gaza Now is an independent media body, according to what it declares, and you can cite its official sources. You can add: There are other parties accusing it of being affiliated with Hamas... Gaza has now categorically denied this... This is how a neutral article should be, which is not biased towards any party. Volkovsami (talk) 11:21, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

Volkovsami No, that's not how Wikipedia works. The main purpose of Wikipedia is to summarize what independent reliable sources state about a topic, not what it says about itself. This organization is free to state its own views on its own social media, as it apparently has. Organizations(and people) can say whatever they want about themselves. Wikipedia is interested in what others say about them, and currently most other sources- at least the four source provided in this article- say this organization is affilated with Hamas. If you have independent sources that report on their disavowing a connection with Hamas, please offer them. 331dot (talk) 11:26, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

Yes, that's how Wikipedia works. You know this exactly and you only want to promote Israeli terrorism that kills civilians and children... If the article about Israel and its terrorist crimes and its killing of children had been from an independent source (Al Jazeera, for example), your response would have been different from this and you would have said that the official Israeli sources deny this. Behind your mind there is a criminal who is being exploited by the Zionists to promote their crimes and racial genocide. Volkovsami (talk) 11:56, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

No one here is promoting terrorism or conflict. Be aware of no personal attacks. If you are too invested in this conflict to be able to set aside your views and contribute dispassionately about this topic, you should find something else to edit about. If necessary, you can be blocked. 331dot (talk) 12:03, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

I haven't said that you are wrong- we just need to see independent sources. I would say that about Israeli media. 331dot (talk) 12:05, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

What you say is wrong. A person cannot be completely blocked on the Internet. In the best cases, the IP address or temporary username that was created only to teach you and give you lessons can be blocked. You are misusing your rules. You are promoting rumors under the guise of an “independent media source”... There are millions of lies promoted by parties that claim to be independent. The parties that claimed to be independent in this article are in themselves media outlets that are not independent, even though they claim to be so. Volkovsami (talk) 12:16, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

I did not tell you that you were wrong. I told you that you must point out that the channel denies that it is affiliated with Hamas. You must also provide evidence that the sources from which you quoted are independent sources Volkovsami (talk) 12:18, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

For example, according to Wikipedia, Al Jazeera is a channel affiliated with the Qatari government, so it is a non-independent media body Volkovsami (talk) 12:20, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

If you wish to challenge the reliability of Al-Jazzera, NPR, the Washington Post, and CTech, you may do so at the reliable sources noticeboard- but you will need to show that those outlets lack, as least with regards to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, that they lack basic journalistic standards of fact checking and editorial control. Being biased does not by itself preclude the use of a source of Wikipedia, unless it is being alleged that the source is so biased that they make things up. A source being affiliated with a government also does not by itself preclude its use on Wikipedia, unless you have evidence the government influences the content being reported.

No one said anything about being blocked from the entire internet, but you can be kept from editing Wikipedia, either temporarily or without an end date. As I notified you of on your user talk page, you are editing in a highly contentious topic area which has stricter rules to do so. 331dot (talk) 12:26, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

The channel is free to deny an affiliation on its own website and social media. The main purpose of Wikipedia is to summarize what independent sources say about a topic, not what it says about itself, which is not subject to fact checking and editorial control. If you have independent sources that report on this organization denying affiliation with Hamas, please offer them. 331dot (talk) 00:10, 14 December 2023 (UTC)