[totalZero]

What you said about disrupting operations in the building applies to the media organizations in the building, too. There is a gaping logical chasm between these two statements:

> Even if they took out some computers, disrupting operations (communication, etc) still achieves targets.

> Given modern technology (satellite and mobile links), it's hardly possible to "suppress and disrupt the media" as everybody can see.

[tguvot]

There is difference between media (uploading random articles and video segments) and military operations (secured communication facilities, etc.)

[totalZero]

Disrupting media operations by blowing up their facilities and equipment is clearly deleterious to their ability to report news. You claim that media organizations are largely unaffected but speculate that Hamas operations in the same building are affected. I find it difficult to wrap my head around the mental gymnastics required to believe those two things simultaneously.

It's like saying without evidence, "Verizon's operations in the World Trade Center were basically unaffected on 9/11, but Morgan Stanley's operations there were crippled."

[tguvot]

There is a difference between media uploading media files and posting articles and for example intelligence/command center that have physical termination of multiple, physical secure lines of communications.

Media can take their laptops, get out and keep on uploading stuff 5 minutes later.

In case of intelligence/command center it will takes weeks to bring all the physical lines to new "secure" location in the city and to get/hookup whatever equipment is used to terminate them.