UPDATE
We have achieved a partial success, albeit one that has raised an interesting angle. While Reuters disagreed with our complaint, the Daily Telegraph agreed to make an amendment to the very same Reuters report that it had republished.
The Telegraph removed the term “live fire” from the opening paragraph and added a further sentence later in the text clarifying that “Others were reported injured by rubber bullets and tear gas.”
As violent riots erupted in the disputed territories and along the Gaza border fence, many Palestinians have been injured in confrontations with the IDF.
As a New York Times editorial, already critiqued by HonestReporting, states:
The Daily Telegraph writes:
Reuters reports:
The Jerusalem Post reports: “Palestinian Red Crescent reported at least 263 injured in the West Bank, of which at least four were wounded by live fire during clashes outside Ramallah.
CNN correctly states: “At least 367 others were injured — seven critically — and taken to hospitals in the West Bank and Gaza, according to the health ministry. Most of them were suffering from injuries caused by tear gas and rubber bullets.”
So who is correct? Were hundreds of Palestinians wounded by “live fire?”
It’s safe to assume that were the IDF to use live fire on rioters, there would be far more than four dead and the varying numbers of wounded quoted in the media.
Not being content with mere assumptions, we asked the IDF for clarification and they informed us that the IDF acts according to strict rules of engagement which rely on an escalation of means, from the less lethal to the lethal. The overwhelming majority of means used by the IDF over the last two weeks have been riot dispersal, such as rubber bullets and tear gas. Live rounds have been used very selectively in specific situations only when where the threat to life or critical infrastructure, such as the Gaza fence, justified it.
It is also important to note that stones and firebombs launched at IDF troops using slingshots and other means of propulsion, can be lethal – context that the media is loathe to acknowledge.
We’ve requested corrections from the above media. If you see the same error repeated in your media, contact us through our Red Alert page or by clicking on the button below.
Featured Image: Flash 90
