Reading the reams of news coverage about Israel that appear in the international media every single day, it is clear there is something akin to a “Palestinian exception” when it comes to reporting on the Israel-Palestinian conflict.
The Palestinian exception could be broadly defined as a tendency by news organizations to treat Palestinians as unique when compared to their coverage of other issues.
Most recently, the exception could be observed in several reports about Israel’s successful counter-terrorism sting on Sunday, which saw Israeli security forces swoop in on a vehicle carrying three terrorists who were armed with an assault rifle and on their way to carry out a shooting attack against Israeli civilians.
The men, who had set out from the terror stronghold West Bank city of Jenin, were later identified as Naif Abu Suias, 26, the head of a terror cell who was being directed by terrorists in the Gaza Strip, Lu’ayy Abu Na’asa and Baraa Ahmed Qurum. All three men were connected to Islamic Jihad.
170. Loay Abu Naasa
171. Nayef Abu Sweis
172. Bara Al-Qerm
Islamic Jihad pic.twitter.com/9uouVgFSRM— Adin – עדין (@AdinHaykin1) August 7, 2023
Despite information about the operation available from the outset — that is, the fact the men were prevented from carrying out an imminent attack and that they were all confirmed terrorists — several international media outlets sought to reframe the entire incident in examples of the Palestinian exception that recasts Palestinian terrorists as victims of Israeli aggression.
The BBC led the way with a piece that was headlined, ‘Israeli security forces kill three Palestinians in West Bank,‘ and only mentions the fact they are “militants” in the main body of the story.
While the BBC later amended its headline following a tweet from HonestReporting, it still presented the terror backgrounds of the dead Palestinians as mere Israeli claims — ‘Israel says its forces killed three Palestinian militants in West Bank‘ — as opposed to incontrovertible fact.
No, @BBCWorld, Israel didn’t just go out and randomly shoot three ordinary Palestinians as your headline implies.
The three were active members of a terrorist cell identified on their way to carry out an attack. https://t.co/y5PX62NvBW pic.twitter.com/hRI7HQP5Su
— HonestReporting (@HonestReporting) August 7, 2023
Similarly, The Times of London opted to use scare quotes around “Palestinian militants” in its headline in a way that served to cast doubt on Israel’s version of events.
In addition, the entire piece was filled with language that questioned whether the men had been armed and dangerous, including by failing to mention that at least one of the men had been claimed by Islamic Jihad and that there is photographic evidence of the seized firearm.
Hey, @thetimes, why the scare quotes?
Given they were found with an assault rifle and Islamic Jihad has claimed one of them, the quotes are unnecessary. pic.twitter.com/9FsFiGcjy0
— HonestReporting (@HonestReporting) August 8, 2023
CNN also failed with both its headline and opening paragraph:
The story itself opened with:
Three Palestinians have been killed by the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) at the Jenin Camp in the occupied West Bank, the IDF announced on Sunday.
The IDF did not announce that it had simply killed three Palestinians. It specifically stated that the three were terrorists, something glaringly omitted by CNN.
But not only that, the IDF hyperlink in the opening sentence goes straight to, not a general page about Israel’s army but a CNN story about the death of Shireen Abu Akleh. Almost as if the writer is doing his or her utmost to push the reader in a certain direction.
So maybe not so surprising that later in the same story, CNN actually acted as a mouthpiece for designated terrorist organization Hamas by paraphrasing its spokesman Hazem Qassem’s threats that the “Zionist enemy” will receive retribution in a way that made it seem like CNN had adopted Hamas’ terminology.
In response to HonestReporting calling out the lack of clarity, CNN responded to say that it had reviewed the piece and is “comfortable that the attribution is clear.” This, despite readers reporting otherwise.
Note to @CNN: If you are going to paraphrase a Hamas spokesman, make sure to include quotation marks in the appropriate places to avoid the impression you have adopted Hamas terminology.
* In this case, “the occupation” is used as a reference to the existence of Israel itself. https://t.co/FCT1EauMoa pic.twitter.com/XqrhuGvwz4
— HonestReporting (@HonestReporting) August 7, 2023
The Palestinian exception is also evident in pieces by news organizations that go to great lengths to blur the line between aggressor and victim.
For example, ABC News Australia in its report of the Tel Aviv terror attack on Saturday in which a Palestinian gunman murdered an Israeli city inspector.
In what is perhaps the grossest example of whitewashing Palestinian terrorism, the outlet reported the attack thus: ‘Palestinian man killed in Tel Aviv shooting that leaves another critically injured.’
And as for the headline on the main @abcnews world news page?
There are no words. pic.twitter.com/5C0PaMJKdO
— HonestReporting (@HonestReporting) August 6, 2023
Liked this article? Follow HonestReporting on Twitter, Facebook, Instagram and TikTok to see even more posts and videos debunking news bias and smears, as well as other content explaining what’s really going on in Israel and the region.
