Yesterday Media Backspin covered the death of a Palestinian girl that was originally blamed on Israel. The Reuters report cited by HR had the Israeli's 600 meters away from the school where the girl was killed.
The Chicago Tribune put the Israeli position 800 yards away.
Al Jazeerah had the soldiers 900 meters away.
My knowledge of firearms is limited, but the distance Israel was from the school should, by itself, given credence to the Israeli version.
Still despite placing the Israeli soldiers nearly a kilometer away from the girl Al-Jazeerah still "reported":
Witnesses said Nuran Did was lining up with classmates to enter the school when she was shot from the Israeli occupation force's Termit post, about 900m away.
On Monday (1/31), 10-year-old Nuran Deab was struck by a bullet in southern Gaza and died shortly thereafter. The IDF immediately suggested the gunshots may have come from nearby Palestinians firing celebratory shots in the air. Further, Reuters stated that 'it did not appear that Israeli soldiers some 600 meters away could have seen into the [school] compound from their position behind high walls.'And this begs the question: How often does the media promote the Palestinian/UN version of events regardless of the truth? In this case proof of the Israeli army's version came quickly, but that's not always so. Usually the false impression is the one that stays and no correction is made. (Although if Israel turns out to be wrong, the media don't let the matter die, as in the case of stretcher Israel claimed was a missile. When the Israeli army acknowledged that it might have been wrong it was widely reported.) This is one of the reasons that Israel comes out looking bad due to poor reporting.Despite this, many news agencies were quick to promote the Palestinian version of events, backed by the UN: