Had a better article, but givesomefucks@lemmy.world didn't like it because it was an Israeli news source. Unfortunately, the mod agreed with him and deleted it due to misinformation. So this is another source. This will hit the wires in the morning. I don't know what these guys are afraid of.
Yeah, I don't know that I would have accepted an Israeli news source reporting on Hamas anymore than, I dunno, Pravda reporting on the latest from Zelenskyy. :)
The Sky article, as weak as it is, is impartial and led me to the Reuters story confirming it.
"95 journalists and media workers were confirmed dead: 90 Palestinian, 2 Israeli, and 3 Lebanese.
16 journalists were reported injured.
4 journalists were reported missing.
25 journalists were reported arrested.
Multiple assaults, threats, cyberattacks, censorship, and killings of family members.
CPJ is also investigating numerous unconfirmed reports of other journalists being killed, missing, detained, hurt, or threatened, and of damage to media offices and journalists’ homes."
Both extremely partisan. Neither what I'd call reliable sources of news but you've probably seen propaganda from both.
Of course the Ukrainian Pravda has literally been able to print facts, unguilded, and they've matched what they would say as propaganda anyway so it's appeared like a reputable news source recently.
That's what happens when Russia genuinely does things like use chemical weapons (cs gas) banned by the Geneva convention.
(For those wondering, even though cs gas is used in riots the convention bans all gas based weapons as they target indiscriminately and could easily be mistaken for nerve agents by either side. Leading to either accidental use of nerve agents or accidental retaliation with something similarly destructive)
Or when the Russians directly hit a nuclear reactor 3 times.
Meanwhile the Russian Pravda has to manufacture its propaganda, like claiming an Islamic State attack which Islamic State issued video evidence of and claimed was somehow Ukrainian.
I wouldn't call it misinformation, but man, this link is AWFUL.
The page is a collection of headlines mostly unrelated to the topic, and the one piece involving the ceasefire is one headline + 2 sentences, sourcing Ali Baraka.
Reuters is reporting it as "deadlocked" but directly quotes Baraka as saying:
"We reject the latest Israeli proposals that the Egyptian side informed us of. The politburo met today and decided this."
Another Hamas official had earlier told Reuters that no progress had been made in the negotiations.
"There is no change in the position of the occupation (Israel) and therefore, there is nothing new in the Cairo talks," the Hamas official, who asked not to be identified, told Reuters. "There is no progress yet."
So you have Baraka saying it's rejected and another un-named official implying talks are still ongoing.
So the Sky page may not necessarily be misinformation, it's just bad reporting.
