It's not the World Court, non-western states, rights groups and Palestinians who have been using the term genocide 'too lightly'. It's the Guardian that's reached the same conclusion far, far too late
These are institutions, not your friends. They are not making an oopsie, they knowingly downplayed genocide because it disagreed with their political commitments, the ideology they enforce through hiring and firing practices and editorial oversight. They had staff members making noise about this on day 1 and rather than accept this they hounded them out.
Here they are telling their staff not to sign solidarity petitions That article, which is also itself full of Zionist false tropes re: what is antisemitism, cites other examples that I recommend reviewing. These include The Guardian firing a cartoonist because they depicted Netanyahu operating on hinself in the shape of Gaza. And firing a columnist for retweeting pro-resistance accounts on Twitter and (correctly) claiming Israel bombed a hospital. This was back when the media figured it just needed its usual apparatus of nisibformation and downplaying to give Israel deniability for some short-lived crimes.
You can also find a member of The Guardian defending Israel’s actions here https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/11/23/as-israel-pounds-gaza-bbc-journalists-accuse-broadcaster-of-bias. As is common for liberal Zionists that happen to be Jewish, they attempt to leverage a false sense of victimization to justify Israel’s crimes and make this about “antisemitism” that they personally exoerience, which 99% of the time is just criticism of Israel. The real goal of these media putsches is to get their Israel-critical colleagues fired, providing their employer with an “acceptable” excuse.
the adage that hindsight is always 20/20 is true and i wish i understood why we don’t use hindsight when creating foresight.
These are institutions, not your friends. They are not making an oopsie, they knowingly downplayed genocide because it disagreed with their political commitments, the ideology they enforce through hiring and firing practices and editorial oversight. They had staff members making noise about this on day 1 and rather than accept this they hounded them out.
Here they are telling their staff not to sign solidarity petitions That article, which is also itself full of Zionist false tropes re: what is antisemitism, cites other examples that I recommend reviewing. These include The Guardian firing a cartoonist because they depicted Netanyahu operating on hinself in the shape of Gaza. And firing a columnist for retweeting pro-resistance accounts on Twitter and (correctly) claiming Israel bombed a hospital. This was back when the media figured it just needed its usual apparatus of nisibformation and downplaying to give Israel deniability for some short-lived crimes.
You can also find a member of The Guardian defending Israel’s actions here https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/11/23/as-israel-pounds-gaza-bbc-journalists-accuse-broadcaster-of-bias. As is common for liberal Zionists that happen to be Jewish, they attempt to leverage a false sense of victimization to justify Israel’s crimes and make this about “antisemitism” that they personally exoerience, which 99% of the time is just criticism of Israel. The real goal of these media putsches is to get their Israel-critical colleagues fired, providing their employer with an “acceptable” excuse.
There is also one or more first hand account of how this dynsmic worked at The Guardian specifically on the issue of genociding Gaza: https://novaramedia.com/2024/03/12/how-the-guardians-editor-in-chief-caved-to-pro-israel-pressure/