NYT refers to a Hezbollah advocate who is familiar with its military activities….one of the stranger twists in sourcing
We are all a bit jaded now when it comes to news sourcing…. but this latest iteration in the New York Times is one to remember. Forget that this article has literally been written hundreds of times over the last 40 plus years of the Lebanon-Israel conflict – though no context is provided, no history at all about the actual translation of these pre-emptive media campaigns by the IDF….no mention even of the Dahiye doctrine (if I remember correctly!) and NO context of the international law aspect of this etc….
The main gem we should remember ahead of the next conflict is the response is from a dude who likes hizbullah, who is somehow “familiar” with its military activities (what does familiar with mean!?) and then, the strangest moment in terms of journalistic devices, this guy then magnimoniously refuses to comment on the secret activities of his friends “for operational reasons”… THEN he goes on to be quoted like a spokesperson…. AND THEN he cannot be identified because of HIZBULLAH’s “security policy” – for whom he is… a friend.
Look – if this was Mohammed Afif, the head spokesmen for Hizbullah who has been very open of late but sometimes strangely refusing to be quoted, but talking at least – then this whole bit needs to be restructured, no matter his own preferences…. if it is not mohammad then, how does it pass muster really… and why not quote experts here or MP figures etc who will say the same thing but that the reader can better evaluate?
FROM THE NYT:
“…A Hezbollah sympathizer in Lebanon who is familiar with the organization’s military activities said that he would not comment on the movements of forces for operational reasons, but that the group asserted “a continuous right to proceed with any step that may reinforce our defenses for Lebanon and the Lebanese.” The man refused to be identified in accordance with Hezbollah’s security policy.