Bias

See, this is what I was saying earlier. There really seems to be a pro-Hizbullah bias:

Media bias? Hours after 60-year-old Fadia Jumaa and her two daughters, Samira, 31, and Sultana, 33, were killed by a Hizbullah rocket attack on their home in the Israeli-Bedouin village of Arab al-Aramshe, the international media has so far largely ignored their deaths.

In the last few days I've been following the Yahoo News slide shows on the Mideast. I did a count of the first 230 or so images (about half) and I found 162 images of carnage in Lebanon, or people protesting against Israel. Of the images that could be considered pro-Israeli, there were only 14. (and that's being generous) The rest of the images were neutral. I was going to do a complete count but I realized it meant nothing. The bias was glaring.

Now the current Yahoo Mideast Conflict slideshow does show more of the Israeli suffering, but that only makes me wonder why it changed. Was the bias so glaring that even those responsible noticed?

***Update:
OK, so maybe there's a good reason for the glut of pro-Hizbullah images. Turns out this fellow, Adnan Hajj, is a one man agitprop factory. And Reuters is... well, let's be charitable and call them dupes. Seems many Adnan Hajj photos are questionable. My favorites -- from Drinking From Home:

Seems this woman is a professional I-lost-my-house-to-the-Jew-bombs impersonator. She struck this pose in front of two different disaster scenes 2 weeks apart.

And from the Jawa Report:

An Israeli plane, not quite fierce looking enough for Hajj, so he Photoshopped in extra "bombs".

You can bet that all of Adnan Hajj's work is going under the microscope.