The formula is displaying an emotional trauma inducing anecdote on mass media coupled with a narrative suggesting action that must be taken to prevent future trauma to the viewer, and then inflicting that trauma and followup narrative repeatedly that as many times as possible through all available media channels. There are hundred of thousands of things that occur on a daily basis all over the world that would induce trauma by viewing or even knowing about them, but if you own TikTok, you can show violent civilian deaths in Gaza instead of Xinjiang prison camps, or Sudan or wherever.

This formula can switch people from fearing to go outside to rioting in the streets in a weekend with enough media power. Anyone who explains what's going on with data and statistics, and doesn't almost involuntarily go along with the trauma conditioning, for better or for worse, is considered to be defective emotionally and an outcast.

Which is why TikTok must die - then social media in general.

It is all very toxic and manipulative

> This kind of sensational event is what social media was designed for

I agree with you! It's much harder to do viral tictoks with harmed israelis, because they built a marvelous defense system, so palestinian rockets (or terrorists) just don't get through.

I feel like that’s a bit like saying it’s fine for an adult to kick a kid. The kid was asking for it after all, even if the adult was never in any danger.

So you say that palestinians as a society are politically incapacitated like kids, and should be governed by some external authority until their society matures enough to self-govern?

I didn’t say anything like that. That’s what you heard.

In the analogy you make I think it’s more likely we need to call CPS.

> CPS

> Child protective services (CPS) is the name of an agency responsible for providing child protection

> Child

(c) wiki

Well, if you compare them to kids, doesn't it mean that they don't have the right of self-governance, as kids don't have full legal rights/responsibilities?

There’s also the fact that Europe and the US support Israel and sell weapons that are used in Gaza and the West Bank. Given the West involvement it’s expected that this is talked about more often in Western news and social media. Just like it’s normal that European news report more on the Ukraine war than the US does. It’s closer to home.

> What's happening in Gaza is a black-and-white injustice. It's disgraceful -- the sort of thing that shocks the conscience.

You say this as if it's a fact, when it is simply your (apparently very biased) opinion. Yes, famines suck, and yes, Gaza is a tragedy. But the situation in Palestine is anything but black and white, it's a direct consequence of one of the most complicated and intricate political messes on this planet. There is nothing clear cut about it, despite what tiktok (just assuming here) wants you believe.

I applaud your good-fauth engagement with GP. Honestly I thought that calling conflict in the middle east "black and white" had to be either subtle humour or outright trolling.

>it's been going on since the inception of Israel

It's been going on ever since at least Judaism, Christianity, and Islam have been warring over who controls the Holy Land. Remember the Crusades? Or the Holocaust?

I'm not sure if it's even worth going all the way back to ancient Egypt's involvement even further back seeing as there's so much on the dinner table already.

Resolutions to the conflicts Israel has with its neighbors are complicated for many reasons. Lasting peace requires a willingness to compromise and to stick to agreements made, which is extremely difficult politically. The moral questions are not that difficult. Do Jewish and Palestinian people have a right to live in their holy land? Yes. Do they have the right to unlawfully occupy land, murder or terrorize or torture their neighbors? No.

both sides will say they "murder" or "terrorise" as a defence. that’s where the moral question comes from and proving "who shot first" etc.

You can't prove "who shot first" because the answer depends entirely on where history starts. People who want to argue about unanswerable questions like these don't want peace. They just seek justifications for further bloodshed. The actual moral questions are not difficult if you believe a Palestinian life is worth as much as any other life.

Israel has “new historians”, legit society polarisation due to its conduct and handling of the conflict, and over 500.000 demonstrations against Netanyahu’s demonic government.

What do Palestinians have that shows their will to believe an Israeli life is worth as much as any other life? (and Palestinian lives also, especially their children’s)

What’s happening in Gaza is skillful manipulation by pro-Hamas propagandists after 75 years of wars. Your reduction of this to “black and white” is absurd on its face, and I’m surprised to see HN agreeing with that.

Sudan has had militants going door to door beheading men and raping women, yet that’s the morally ambiguous conflict for you? It’s again a war between two (or 3) militant groups with a long history. How are their civilians not at least as deserving of peace as Palestinians?

People are sensitive to the injustice they see or others push to see.

Collective punishment is a war crime not justice.

> They just want to permanently make life of people in Gaza - at least for a generation - a living hell to teach them a lesson to never try Oct. 7 again.

Nothing fair about that. Most of the people suffering had nothing to do with the events they're being punished for.

>had nothing to do with the events

They support(ed) Hamas.

While I hate the thought of civvies getting caught in the crossfires of war, to say they are/were completely unrelated is a false statement.

Very sincerely: You are no better.

Consider reading what you just wrote, perhaps looking in the mirror, and reevaluating your thought process. Even for Hacker News I expect better than this.

I am annoyed and bored by this rhetoric, when something doesn't suit you, try to attack, the truth is you're starving and bombing people and journalists for "teaching them for next time", there's no look in the mirror, you're criminals. The journalists supported Hamas too?

I realize that many commenters have been egregiously breaking HN's guidelines in this thread, but calling for expulsion of populations is beyond the pale and totally unacceptable. We ban accounts that post such things. No more of this, please.

We've had to warn you many times over the years not to post flamewar comments to HN but this is a degree of shocking I wouldn't have expected from you or any other longstanding HN user.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Most Americans supported or voted for presidents that bombed innocent people. Does that mean Americans therefore “deserved” 9/11? According to your moral logic any action against American civilians is tragically justified retaliation for their support of warmongering US presidents. It’s surprising how easily people justify bombing others when they would never apply those standards to themselves.

American civvies have a role and blame in everything America does since we vote for our President and Congress, regardless which way anyone votes (or doesn't vote). The price for our freedom and power is responsibility.

So yes: 9/11 was quite deserved in the sense that we poke(d) our dirty noses in other peoples' (Middle East's) business. This is separate from civvies getting caught in the crossfire, which is tragic regardless of blame; there is a reason deliberately targeting civilians is a war crime.

For another example: Germans who ultimately voted for Hitler and the Nazi party and thus played a role in the Holocaust, among many other travesties.