Um...

Wow you found another post which didn't contain passive language. What's your point? I can do the same for most BBC articles which are published in multiple regions and some of them use active language while others use passive language.

The language used in the OP still stands and it's from Sky.

Okay - but this report is about her body being recovered. They have mutiple other articles where they directly assign blame (what I embedded), the video from the tweet covers the situation that lead to these two journalist's deaths, including the IDF preventing recovery teams from entering the area to try and save them or recover the bodies.

This report is a development in the broad story about Israel killing them, specifically about their bodies having been recovered. It's not passive voice, you've just misunderstood the subject they're being active in reporting. The headline is (weirdly, given it's sky news) good, transparent journalism.

You make some valid sounding points and you might be right in this case I'll delete my post until I have time for further research.

I watched the video and at 0:35 Sky News says she's working for an "Hezbollah aligned news organisation" and other propaganda to justify her murder. This is even worse than I thought.

Video for those who want to watch it https://xcancel.com/SkyNews/status/2047053030567125405

I'm unclear on why 'hezbollah aligned news organization' is contentious? They've always been close to march 8; they're probably the best arabic news source that is, and they're outspoken progressives as well. That's not an inaccurate characterization.

I think the issue is that they want regular folks to see this and go "ah, this woman was a terrorist, I guess you FAFO", at least I believe that's the intent considering the pattern of western media dehumanizing resistance movements and such.

Oh, thank you. That does seem like an easy interpretation; I suppose being from the region/being (vaguely...) aligned with hezbollah's role in this conflict myself may be coloring my perspective here.

In the eyes of a Western audience this basically means she was working for "terrorists".

Imagine studying to become a journalist, then your boss says that you have to do fluff pieces for the top mass murderer of journalists. And then do so happily.

Yhea. every single one of those journalists should be blacklisted, they are the scum of the earth.

The article say it may be a war crime and put target3d in quote as if it is a matter of opinion and not objectively true

In the UK it's considered defamatory to say someone did a crime until they've been convicted of it, and it's Isreal, so fat chance of that happening. This isn't just used to protect genocidal ethnostates, but also wrongly-accused innocent people. Sky are using the harshest language they legally can until the Hague successfully prosecutes someone for this.

Damn, of course. I should really start watching more western news coverage, I'm starting to forget what the narrative is...