What is it about Western media journalists and legitimizing Hamas numbers and figures?
ABC broadcast journalist and Trump-Harris debate moderator Linsey Davis may appear professional and well-composed, but there’s more than meets the eye.
One of the hot-button issues brought forth in the Tuesday night debate was the candidates’ position on the Israel-Hamas war and how they would negotiate an end to it. Davis posed the following question to Harris first:
In December you said, “Israel has a right to defend itself” but you added, “It matters how.” Saying international humanitarian law must be respected, Israel must do more to protect innocent civilians. You said that nine months ago. Now an estimated 40,000 Palestinians are dead. Nearly 100 hostages remain. Just last week Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said there’s not a deal in the making. President Biden has not been able to break through the stalemate. How would you do it?
Let’s break this down, and evaluate what is inherently wrong and biased or leading about this.
The 40,000 figure Gazan death toll
“An estimated 40,000 Palestinians are dead.” Estimated by whom, @linseydavis? BY HAMAS! (And 17,000 are dead terrorists.) pic.twitter.com/s2jWIbB35F
— HonestReporting (@HonestReporting) September 11, 2024
The fact that Davis did not credit the 40,000 death toll figure to Hamas is obvious. She also did not make a distinction that even Western media tends to make – Hamas numbers never differentiate between civilians and terrorists. Further, she is implying that the IDF targets innocent civilians, and by pressing Harris on an update of her stance on the issue after nine months of continued war and death, she places most of the fault on Israel rather than Hamas.
Why is @ABC repeating Hamas talking points which have been disproven?
40,000 civilians have NOT been killed in Gaza.#Debate2024
— StopAntisemitism (@StopAntisemites) September 11, 2024
So, why is it important to clarify that these are Hamas numbers and, therefore, are unreliable?
Because Hamas, as a terror organization, has a history of inflating numbers and cannot be trusted. One example came as recently as Monday. Hamas claimed 40 dead civilians as a result of an Israeli strike. The strike targeted three senior Hamas commanders directly involved in the October 7 massacre. They were conveniently embedded in a designated humanitarian zone. However, after rolling out the initial number, Hamas later revised it to “at least 19.”
Suggesting that Israel does not do enough to protect civilians
Saying international humanitarian law must be respected, Israel must do more to protect innocent civilians. You said that nine months ago. Now an estimated 40,000 Palestinians are dead.
Let’s focus a bit more on the insinuation here.
This is a biased and misleading question. Davis is implying that Israel isn’t respecting or abiding by international humanitarian law. But it is. In fact, the IDF does more than necessary.
When urban military experts like John Spencer as well as lawyers corroborate this, who is this American journalist to suggest Israel is not doing enough to prevent civilian casualties to an audience of approximately 67 million viewers?
Moreover, suggesting that the onus of civilian deaths and continuation of the war belongs to Israel alone is dangerous and despicable. What about Hamas? They could have continued the ceasefire nine months ago by releasing the rest of the hostages under the previous deal.
But they didn’t.
This could have been over long ago. Instead, negotiators have been bending over backwards and pulling teeth to close a new deal for months. Civilians on both sides continue to suffer the consequences.
Yes, civilians on both sides. That’s something often ignored, and ignored by Davis as well in the phrasing of her question. Do Gaza civilians reserve the only right to claim displacement and death? Absolutely not.
Failing to acknowledge that nearly 100,000 Israelis are still displaced since October 7, and that Israelis are still killed by either Hezbollah rockets, West Bank terror, et cetera is to ignore the facts on the ground.
Israel’s hostage numbers: a minor correction
Nearly 100 hostages remain.
This estimated digit alludes to the 97 hostages left who were taken on October 7 only. While it is not incorrect in that sense, there are also four Israelis who were taken captive in 2014 and 2015 – Hadar Goldin, Avera Mengistu, Hisham al-Sayed and Oron Shaul. Two of them are still believed to be alive. This brings the real number to 101.
It’s an important distinction to make, and minimizing the number voluntarily to fit a narrative or for any other reason misleads the audience and minimizes the suffering of their families.
Is Netanyahu the reason for a ceasefire and hostage deal stalemate?
Just last week Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said there’s not a deal in the making. President Biden has not been able to break through the stalemate.
False statements again. Accusing Israel, like much of Western media, for being the hold-up to a deal. In the press conference Davis is referring to, Prime Minister Netanyahu actually said the following:
I’m willing to make a deal. The real obstacle to making a deal is not Israel and it’s not me. It [is] Hamas…. I put forward a proposal by Israel, which Secretary Blinken called extremely generous. On May 31st, having met Blinken again, I said, we agreed to the US-backed proposal, and Hamas refused. On August 16th, the US brought forth what they called the final bridging proposal. Again, we accepted, Hamas refused. On August 19th, Secretary Blinken said, Israel accepted the US proposal, now Hamas has to do the same.
Netanyahu did not say that there is no deal on the table. He actually said that Israel giving into more concessions at this point to close a deal sets a dangerous precedent for Hamas to continue killing hostages to get whatever they want. The premier noted U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken said it’s up to Hamas to agree, and it doesn’t appear that they are accepting any deal on the table.
While the Philadelphi Corridor is a demand that appears to be a red line for Netanyahu, it is not the only or the first dealbreaker standing in the way of a deal.
Davis’ follow-up question for Trump
President Trump, how would you negotiate with Netanyahu and also Hamas in order to get the hostages out and prevent the killing of more innocent civilians in Gaza?
By phrasing her question in this way, Davis equates Netanyahu, the prime minister of a democratic country, with a terror organization that brutally massacred 1,200 people, burned down homes, looted, and took 251 women, children, elderly and men hostage.
Additionally, she is putting a potential U.S. president in the position of negotiating directly with terrorists, when that is against U.S. policy. The U.S. generally speaks with third parties only when dealing with terror organizations like Hamas.
Bottom line: Americans deserve better from their media, and certainly from a moderator of such a high-profile debate.
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.
Image Credits:
Linsey Davis: Photo by Monica Schipper/Getty Images for The Alliance for Women in Media Foundation
Debate: Photo by Win McNamee/Getty Images
