You can imagine what Reuters was looking for.
And they found exactly what they wanted--just in the first paragraph alone:
The Zionist regime has given orders to allow Israeli troops to fire live rounds on Palestinians protesting the illegal Apartheid Wall surrounding Jerusalem. So as not to acquire bad press, the order to use lethal force against protesters does not extend to protests in which Israeli and international peace activists are also participating.Having started this new feature and selecting the particular post they wanted, Reuters hedges:
The following blog post is from an independent writer and is not connected with Reuters News. The opinions and views expressed herein are those of the author and are not endorsed by Reuters.com. [emphasis added]The fact that Reuters has this trash does imply a certain level of endorsement--especially considering the fact that instead of "opinions and views," Reuters has decided feature a blog claiming to present something as fact without giving any source whatsoever. [Update: Actually that is not true--the post quotes The International Middle East Media Center, which specifies no source, other than unnamed "Israeli media sources".]
Reuters' sloppiness is exceeded only by the lack of integrity of the blog they showcase.
Actually, what Reuters did was especially atrocious since it amounts to 'laundering' Arab propaganda--take an unreliable Arab news source, the article is quoted in a blog, then the blog is showcased as a commentary of an established 'fact'
Is this the new trend in news reporting?
Crossposted on Soccer Dad
[Hat tip: Honest Reporting]