Al Jazeera has a long-standing strong and vocal bias against the USA. It seems to be pretty well known.
I have been reading their articles for months. I guarantee you that bias still shows through. Even in their "toned-down" state, I have felt my ears get red reading some of their articles.
They have hardly been warped to be "pro-US". I would be more concerned if their voice had actually swung to be "pro-US"; as things stand, they seem to have gone from "extremely critical of the US" to "still critical but a little nicer about it".
Can you cite a few so there's a basis for discussion? I see a lot of people saying they're anti-US, but it's usually supported with articles and video critical of government actions, not the country itself.
In regards to the anti-US bit- I do not mean to say they hate America. I have no reason to believe they wish America ill- though they certainly seem to wish America would get out of the Middle East. What I mean is they appear to have a very critical bias towards the actions of America, and I suspect this is what most people mean when they describe Al Jazeera as "anti-US". This bias is not unilaterally a bad thing- but that does not mean it does not exist.
Conflating "America" with "the US Government" plays into the simplistic arguments of those that try to paint their enemies as "hating our freedom" when they simply take issue with having their families murdered.
That's an opinion piece. It's even filed under "opinion" with a big section header so you can't confuse it for a news report. Are we talking about bias in opinion pages or news reporting?
Biased? That article? I thought it a very fair analysis, evenhanded almost to a fault.
You might not agree, of course, but bias isn't about whether you agree or not. It's a systematic favouring of one side of an argument over others, regardless of facts. I don't see much evidence of that in the article, which is a fairly dry analysis of the realpolitik affecting the region and the coming UN vote.
I have been reading their articles for months. I guarantee you that bias still shows through. Even in their "toned-down" state, I have felt my ears get red reading some of their articles.
They have hardly been warped to be "pro-US". I would be more concerned if their voice had actually swung to be "pro-US"; as things stand, they seem to have gone from "extremely critical of the US" to "still critical but a little nicer about it".