Mohammad of Vancouver writes:
We all agree that Joe Biden
was is in Munich for an international security conference. We all agree
that he spoke about the new direction in US foreign policy. But that's
all USA and the rest of the world
can agree on because opinions about the content of his speech vary depending on who is reporting it. Let's compare the headlines:
Guardian: Obama administration offers olive branch to Russia and Iran
Al-Jazeera: US softens foreign policy stance
Press TV/Iran: The US vice president: US will integrate 'change' with its foreign policy
Voice of America: Biden: US Willing to Talk to Iran
Yahoo News: Biden vows break with Bush era foreign policy
This is how the world interprets Biden's policy speech in Munich. Now let's turn to the US's paper of record, the New York Times: Laying Out Foreign Policy Agenda, Biden Takes a Hard Line
What are the parameters of this contrast in understanding the same speech? here are some possible suggestions:
1- American media delusions: New York Times is not listening to Biden, because they hear what they like to hear.
American public delusion: Americans, however inaccurately, need to
think that their new government is as bold as the previous one.
3- American Zionists' delusion: We can soften our stance, but to keep a hardline image lest pro-Israel Americans freak out.
be fair, I have included the actual speech, so you can decide for
yourself whether he was softening his stance, or hardening it. Munich speech in Washington Post
P.S. Times has now given its story a softer headline. Not much, but softer.