Thread by @sfrantzman

Articles like this illustrate the corrosive nature of how media use the term “disinformation” as a stand in for actually covering things on the ground or reporting what happened

Here you have an entire article that admits 800 people were killed, the article claims that some old videos were repackaged and some people falsely reported that others were killed…but where is the evidence that the “disinformation” led to “intensified” violence? Do they mean the information that was provided to SNA-backed militias who went on a rampage in Latakia? No. They don’t even mention them

The one place that rumors and propaganda did influence killing was in the attacks by the militias in response to the pro-Assad attacks. But this article doesn’t seem to unpack that or discuss it. It doesn’t even seem to interview people on the ground. Because western media have been encouraged to discuss “disinformation” as a stand in for actual reporting

It’s not “disinformation” to spread an old video online, unless the person who posted the video purposely knew it was old and is purposely trying to create panic. But in a situation where 800 people have been killed, as the article says, people will naturally panic.

Let’s ask if this was Germany or Denmark and 800 people were killed in one day? Let’s say hundreds of members of a minority group were massacred in any European city? You’re probably expect panic and fear and lots of videos to emerge. Would it be “disinformation” if some of the videos or reports were wrong? Or would it be natural that in a situation where hundreds of people are killed that some information is wrong?

There was and is a very REAL NEED for media to INVEST RESOURCES in going to Latakia and speaking with people. But it’s easier to talk about “disinformation”…and this key word was put out as a talking point among everyone who backs the current government in Damascus. Basically every person who is involved started saying “disinformation” back on March 7. The second details emerged of civilians being massacred we were told it was “disinformation.” Except it wasn’t. Many civilians were killed. The exact number is not clear. However, one civilian murdered by security forces is TOO MANY

If police went on a rampage in a western country and murdered 200 civilians I think we’d all take it seriously rather than rush to cover it up with claims it’s “disinformation.” Only because it’s Syria, the murder of a hundred or two hundred civilians is seen as kind of a normal thing. And any report about it is dismissed as “disinformation.”

Contrarian view: There was basically no “disinformation” regarding the massacre in Latakia. There were some inflated death tolls. A few old videos. The fact is that the pro-Damascus crowd immediately began saying “disinformation” about the killings. Most of them then had to admit that numerous civilians were murdered but they shifted the blame to “extrajudicial” killings etc. “disinformation” is a corrosive talking point used to obfuscate and cover up what is happened and get journalists not to cover things from the ground

Every time you hear the word “disinformation” you have a duty to investigate. Usually they are using this term to get you not to look deeper and find out what happened from people on the ground. They want you to believe everything you hear is a conspiracy as opposed to find out the details.

Ask questions, investigate. Don’t let media just say “disinformation” and then have THAT be the story.