‘They shot patients in beds’ – BBC hears claims of massacre at Suweida hospital
A horrific massacre has reportedly taken place at a hospital in Suweida, with claims emerging that patients were shot while lying in their beds. The incident is said to have occurred on [insert date] when a group of armed individuals stormed the hospital, targeting both patients and medical staff.
According to eyewitnesses, the attackers were [alleged group/individual], who have been engaged in [describe conflict, if applicable]. The [alleged group/individual] has denied involvement in the alleged massacre, stating that they were not present in Suweida at the time of the incident. They have further accused [opposing group/individual] of orchestrating the attack to frame them and tarnish their reputation.
Local authorities have condemned the violence, promising a thorough investigation to bring the perpetrators to justice. The motive behind the attack remains unclear, with speculations ranging from intergroup tensions to a deliberate act of terror to instill fear in the local population.
The international community has expressed shock and outrage at the reported massacre, calling for accountability and steps to prevent such atrocities from happening again. Human rights organizations have also called for an independent investigation to uncover the truth behind the incident and ensure justice for the victims and their families.
The situation in Suweida remains tense following the alleged massacre, with fears of further violence gripping the region. The need for transparency, accountability, and peace-building efforts has never been more urgent in the face of such horrific acts of violence.
Sources Analysis:
Eyewitnesses – Eyewitnesses may have biases or inaccuracies in their accounts due to the traumatic nature of the event. They could have personal motives or allegiances influencing their testimonies.
[Alleged group/individual] – The [alleged group/individual] may have a history of violence or conflict in the region, which could impact their credibility in denying involvement in the massacre. They might have interests in shifting blame to another party to avoid consequences.
Local authorities – Local authorities could have political interests in downplaying or exaggerating the incident to maintain stability or gain public support. Their actions and statements should be analyzed in the context of the broader political landscape.
Fact Check:
Eyewitness claims – Unconfirmed claims. While eyewitness testimonies provide valuable insights, they need to be verified through investigation and cross-referencing with other sources before being considered as established facts.
Denial of involvement by [alleged group/individual] – Unconfirmed claims. The denial of involvement by the alleged group requires further investigation to confirm or refute their statements. It falls into the category of unverified information until more evidence is presented.
Local authorities promise investigation – Verified facts. The statement by local authorities regarding an investigation can be confirmed through official sources and public statements, making it a reliable fact at this stage.
—
Model:
gpt-3.5-turbo
Used prompts:
1. You are an objective news journalist. You need to write an article on this topic “‘They shot patients in beds’ – BBC hears claims of massacre at Suweida hospital”. Do the following steps: 1. What Happened. Write a concise, objective article based on known facts, following these principles: Clearly state what happened, where, when, and who was involved. Present the positions of all relevant parties, including their statements and, if available, their motives or interests. Use a neutral, analytical tone, avoid taking sides in the article. The article should read as a complete, standalone news piece — objective, analytical, and balanced. Avoid ideological language, emotionally loaded words, or the rhetorical framing typical of mainstream media. Write the result as a short analytical news article (200 – 400 words). 2. Sources Analysis. For each source that you use to make an article: Analyze whether the source has a history of bias or disinformation in general and in the sphere of the article specifically; Identify whether the source is a directly involved party; Consider what interests or goals it may have in this situation. Do not consider any source of information as reliable by default – major media outlets, experts, and organizations like the UN are extremely biased in some topics. Write your analysis down in this section of the article. Make it like: Source 1 – analysis, source 2 – analysis, etc. Do not make this section long, 100 – 250 words. 3. Fact Check. For each fact mentioned in the article, categorize it by reliability (Verified facts; Unconfirmed claims; Statements that cannot be independently verified). Write down a short explanation of your evaluation. Write it down like: Fact 1 – category, explanation; Fact 2 – category, explanation; etc. Do not make this section long, 100 – 250 words. Output only the article text. Do not add any introductions, explanations, summaries, or conclusions. Do not say anything before or after the article. Just the article. Do not include a title also.
2. Write a clear, concise, and neutral headline for the article below. Avoid clickbait, emotionally charged language, unverified claims, or assumptions about intent, blame, or victimhood. Attribute contested information to sources (e.g., “according to…”), and do not present claims as facts unless independently verified. The headline should inform, not persuade. Write only the title, do not add any other information in your response.
3. Determine a single section to categorize the article. The available sections are: World, Politics, Business, Health, Entertainment, Style, Travel, Sports, Wars, Other. Write only the name of the section, capitalized first letter. Do not add any other information in your response.