(PORTLAND) — War makes great clickbait- so it’s no wonder the role of news media as an arbiter of truth is under fire. Between purported pro-Israel bias, challenges in journalists’ access to the warzone, and the proliferation of misinformation, it’s difficult to discern what, if any, coverage is trustworthy.
Censorship Enforcing Bias:
The media landscape often reflects a pro-Israel bias, notably through the silencing of Palestinian perspectives. According to Aljazeera, news outlets have long aimed to “silence academics, activists and journalists who offer Palestinian perspectives, so that Israeli views prevail.”
One example includes Zahraa Al-Akhrass losing her job at Canada’s Global News for highlighting Palestinian suffering. She posted an Instagram video, saying “Being their only Palestinian journalist in the newsroom, I thought my voice would matter.”
Her termination underscores the fear many journalists face: the risk of losing their jobs for presenting narratives that diverge from the dominant discourse. This form of censorship not only skews public perception but also undermines journalistic integrity by marginalizing crucial voices in the conflict.
Lack of Access:
Access to the heart of the conflict is a significant barrier to balanced reporting. For example, during the recent conflict, international agencies like French-based newsroom AFP reported their inability to send special envoys to Gaza.
Instead, “for the International Federation of Journalists (IFJ), this has forced reporters to rely heavily on “official” sources, without being able to verify their claims.” However, official sources can not only be biased, but incorrect.
In turn, this reliance often leads to unverified and biased reporting. An instance illustrating this is the claim by the “Hamas health ministry that 200 to 300 people had been killed in a strike on [a] hospital,” something it blamed Israel for. This assertion gained traction before being debunked.
Misinformation is rampant in conflict reporting, with media outlets often prioritizing speed over accuracy. The IFJ warns against “confusing haste with speed,” as “many media [outlets] have published false information and images that have not been contextualized, verified or presented as reliable.”
The Associated Press covers a few of these claims stating, “Among the fabrications, users have shared false claims that a top Israeli commander had been kidnapped, circulated a false video imitating a BBC News report, and pushed old and unrelated clips of Russian President Vladimir Putin with inaccurate English captions.”
This trend not only misleads the public but also contributes to a polarized and misinformed understanding of the conflict.
To mend the rifts in media coverage of the Israel-Hamas war, an ethical overhaul is in order. Prioritizing accurate, humane storytelling over political narratives and the race for viewership may not pay out, but it is a vital step toward restoring the integrity of journalism in conflict reporting. By focusing on people rather than profit or politics, the media can begin to address the biases, challenges, and misinformation that currently mar coverage in the Middle East.