Will you accept evidence? Or will you downvote and call me a Russian bot?
[…] Or downvote and maybe throw an insult my way, that works too.

Really? You could not do it without weird and undounded assumptions? C’mon, grow up.

Anyway, I appriciate you provide actual reasoning for your arguments. I’ll read into it.

I’m not. And you are nothing but insulting.

No, I don’t think so. But that also comes from arguments I had with the user before and other users in this thread claming this article was manufacturing consent.

So? US-based subscribers make up sixty percent compared to european readers, but this is definitely targeting US-americans and no way I, as a european, am part of the target audience?

You are, like the others I had the dubious pleasure to discuss under this post, not providing any evidence for all the bogus claims you are making.

Why should US citizens be the target audience for a british medium?

Who is, according to you?

Where did I state the information used for propaganda can’t be true? In the sentence you quoted I talk about the audience’s conclusion, not the presented information.

You repeatedly fail to show where the concepts you present are applicable to the article. You keep deflecting, moving goalposts around and dodging the actual questions.

it just means you’re swaying public opinion.

How exactly is this article doing this?

Propaganda is communication that is primaroly used to influence or persuade an audience to further an agenda. Methods to do so would be using selective facts, loaded language, etc so the audience does not come to a rational conclusion but a fabricated one.
Which facts does the article leave out, where does the article use loaded language, which effects do these parts have and how does that make me, a european, want the US go to war on Iran?

You’d need to show how this is more than simply reporting events and the POV of participants. You’d have to show how the intention is propaganda, how the article manipulates the reader, etc. You’d need to show how this differs from the reporting of ICE crimes, for example.

And then you’d need to show how the article tries to convince me that a US military intervention would be something I as a european should support.

Nice wiki quote. Now show me, where this applies to the article.

you are the one corroborating the claim iran is killing its people

Do you know what (to) corroborate means?

But it’s genuinely disheartening how readily nominally progressive spaces are jumping abord the manufactured consent for an imperialist military intervention by Israel and the US.

Please provide evidence where this generally left-of-centre british reporting is “manufacturing consent”. Which text lines do you think are trying to make us readers agree to that kind of action by these two states?

What did I invent, exactly?

we are very aware of the guardian’s propaganda

Evidence or GTFO.

I am doing nothing. You are claiming bullshit and don’t even know jackshit about the news outlets you’re making up shit about.

Also, I’m not even from the US.

That’s a claim you’d need to provide evidence for. Really, really good evidence.

The Guardian is british.

I would invent so many new insults had I to cycle such crowded bike lanes with such ignorant pedestrians.

I figured as much. That’s why I thought it might be helpful to explain the cryptic term to make communications easier. Hoped it was helpful.

So? I mean, while honorably clearing up some confusion, you created another point of confusion for someone else to clear up.

But most people with English as an additional language live outside countries where English is a native language. So again, when addressing people who speak English but not as their native language, why use terms that are exclusively used in countries with English as a native language?

Or do you think the internet exists only in countries where English is a native language?