On May 20, Israel agreed to a “mutual and unconditional” cease-fire with the US-designated Hamas terrorist group that rules the Gaza Strip.
While the IDF’s mission to protect Israelis from the more than 4,000 rockets that were launched by Palestinian terrorist groups has ended, the media’s skewed coverage of Hamas’ ongoing war aimed at eradicating the Jewish state has perpetuated a virulently anti-Israeli narrative. This agenda-driven reporting has also contributed to an explosion of antisemitic attacks worldwide.
Below, are some of the most egregious examples of how The New York Times, The Washington Post, BBC, CNN and other major media outlets produced misleading headlines about the conflict, many of which totally ignored Palestinian terrorism.
Join the fight for Israel’s fair coverage in the news
Blaming Jerusalem For Everything: Prior to the latest escalation of violence, most media outlets were already adopting Hamas’ false narrative connecting the eventual war to a real estate dispute between a few private parties that was an apparent attempt by Israel to “Judaize” Jerusalem, as well as to simultaneous rioting by tens of thousands of Arabs on the Temple Mount and near the Old City’s Damascus Gate. In doing so, The Washington Post and other news organizations effectively gave Hamas carte blanche to start a conflict that it wanted.
A headline that more accurately reflected reality might have read:
“Sheikh Jarrah Highlights History of Palestinian Opposition to Jewish Presence in Jerusalem”
Ignoring Palestinian Violence: In the days leading up to the outbreak of war, media chose to ignore rampant Palestinian incitement that fueled the violence perpetrated by Muslims at the Al Aqsa Mosque throughout much of Ramadan, during which Palestinians waved Hamas flags and called for the terrorist group to “bomb, bomb Tel Aviv.” Palestinian “protesters” also lobbed firecrackers, stones chairs and even shoes at Israeli police, who, mind you, “clashed” with the rioters.
The New York Times would have been much closer to the mark had it gone with this headline:
“After Palestinian Rioters at Al Aqsa Call on Hamas to Attack Israel, Terrorist Group Obliges,
Leading to Israeli Retaliatory Airstrikes”
Lumping Terrorists with Civilians: From the first day of the escalation, news organizations such as CNN were fixated on providing readers with casualty figures without noting that a huge percentage of Gazans injured or killed were either terrorists, or the result of said terrorists committing the double war crime of indiscriminately launching rockets at Israeli citizens from residential areas and even schools inside the Gaza Strip.
See, for example, the headline below:
But had CNN been interested in conveying the facts, its headline may have read:
“In Response to Gaza Rocket Attacks, Ramped Up Israeli Airstrikes Take Out More Terrorists”
Related Reading: 5 Ways Media are Twisting Coverage of Israel-Hamas Conflict
Slamming Israel For Providing Early Warning of Airstrikes: During what the IDF dubbed “Operation Guardian of the Walls,” Israel took extraordinary steps to minimize the loss of life in Gaza, often going beyond its obligations under international law. Yet, even the supreme value that the Jewish state places on human life was twisted:
The Washington Post should have considered Hamas’ long history of human rights violations. Had it done so, its headline may have read:
“Moments Before Gaza Blast, Family Forced Into Line of Fire By Hamas. Mother Dies as a Result.”
Lambasting Israel For Bombing AP, Al Jazeera Offices in Gaza: News organizations went into overdrive following an Israeli airstrike that destroyed a high-rise building in Gaza that housed the local offices of The Associated Press (AP) and Al Jazeera, among other outlets. What was virtually unreported was that the IDF had given advance warning of the mission to allow for civilians to evacuate. As a result, no injuries were reported. Moreover, members of Hamas’ intelligence unit had allegedly been operating out of the same building. As such, the terrorist group was using journalists as human shields. But instead of calling out Hamas for violating international law by turning an office building into a military site, Axios opened its reporting of the story with this headline:
An alternate opening should have thus been weighed given the reality on the ground:
“AP, Al Jazeera ‘Horrified’ at Gaza Offices Being Turned Into Terrorist Base By Hamas”
Covering Up Spike in Global Antisemitism: As Israel fought to protect its citizens, there was a dramatic rise in antisemitic attacks throughout the globe. Nevertheless, media organizations failed to connect the dots between Hamas’ ideological commitment to quite literally killing every Jew on Earth and attacks by pro-Palestinian mobs.
Only by ignoring the link between Hamas and the violence being perpetrated against Jews could headlines such as this have been generated:
Had The New York Times long ago not done away with all journalistic standards when reporting on Israel, its headline may have gone something like this:
“In Washington and Capitals Around the World, Pro-Hamas Rallies Degenerate Into Violence Against Jews”
The News Story That Wasn’t: Despite the intense coverage given to the Israel-Hamas conflict, media outlets went mute the moment a story developed that could not be spun in a way to paint Israel in a negative light. Such was the case when the Jewish state reopened one of the country’s crossings with the Gaza Strip to allow for the transfer of humanitarian aid. This, even as thousands of rockets were raining down on Israel. Furthermore, few, if any, outlets reported that terrorists in Gaza purposely targeted the crossing with rocket fire with a view to shutting it down.
Perhaps the following headline could have helped raise awareness about Hamas’ brutality and total lack of concern for its own people.
“Hamas Couldn’t Care Less: Terrorist Group Endangers Palestinians By Preventing Aid From Entering Gaza”
On average, 8 out of 10 people will view an article’s headline, but only 2 out of 10 will read the rest of the story. So while the fighting on ground has ceased, the battle for fact-based coverage about Israel continues.
