The situation in Aleppo is truly a strange one. Is what happened the “fall of Aleppo” or the “liberation of Aleppo”?
I’m usually able to find a balanced opinion by comparing Christian Science Monitor, Al-Jazeera and RT on _most_ issues, but when it comes to Aleppo, it’s just not possible.
To CSM’s credit, they’ve been reporting on the Middle East and specific issues in Islam even in decades when nobody else in the West was.
Yet, as unbiased as they work at being, Aleppo is one of those situations that even the least biased journalism around is going to take a stance.
Granted, it’s a mild spin. If you take the Pro-West bias into account and try to subtract it (knowing that the RT view will be declarative of victory as this has been one Russia’s major campaigns (whereas the US involvement was ultimately more lukewarm), it’s not a bad read if you need some meaty details.
Do I consider this the “liberation of Aleppo” or the “fall of Aleppo”?
Honestly? I don’t know. I’m still waiting for some news that’s unbiased on Aleppo but this is the closest I can find.
To those who strongly feel that this is a liberation, please help me and find an article that’s as detailed as this but with a liberation-of-Aleppo stance I’d really like to compare.
I found three sources that I like on most issues: CSM, Al-Jazeera and RT. With Aleppo, I know where each stands. I’d like to find an alternative that’s equally “mildly biased” that isn’t RT, because when it comes to Aleppo, they have a clear strong stance.
For example, you can take the CSM article, and just flip a few of the mildly biased words around (change “fall of Aleppo” to “liberation of Aleppo”, make a few more ‘mood’ changes, and you’ve got a relatively less biased news article that’s pro liberation of Aleppo.
That’s what I’m looking for.