Now they need to admit there are narratives that go far beyond Israel.

And I am not surprised in the least by the content of this story.

In the '70s the new movement was the "New Journalism"--no news source can be perfectly unbiased, therefore everybody's biased. If you're going to be biased, embrace it--journalism had suddenly sprouted agendas because the reporters coming into the field had agendas.

In other words, "fixed narratives and activist journalism over a tradition of fact-based reporting." This bias and shift towards agenda-based reporting, establishing silos and deplatforming "false" narratives and "malinformation" that might lead people to misunderstand things that might be confusing, well, that's just increased over time. Until even some into the earlier forms of new journalism are repulsed. Not to worry--there are a lot new recruits to get in the proselytizing business.

Personally, I can't avoid silos so I silo hop. Did it in the '70s and early '80s with American news sources and Soviet ones, and the split these days is not all that much different.

Sometimes narratives form for the most ridiculous reasons: editor wants to go home early, tells the reporter "Story's about X. Hurry up and write it, and we both get out of here." But you're right, agenda journalism is nothing new and alive and well. Like you, I silo hop.

Sad when the NGO’s become ‘the hard left.’