Berl Falbaum
At first, I didn’t notice it, but as the war in Gaza progressed, it became apparent to me that Hamas was mentioned less and less as a party in the conflict.
Both on television and in print, the entire emphasis has been on Israeli military operations alongside of continuous coverage of civilian casualties with an emphasis, of course, on women and children.
Seldom was Hamas even mentioned in the stories giving the impression that Israel is alone in the fight and does not face any military opposition, that the IDF was simply firing its weapons against a non-existent enemy, and causing unjust grief for civilian Gazans.
I had doubts about my conclusion and held my “computer tongue” until I read an essay in The Guardian that provided some proof of what I thought I was witnessing.
Here are some excerpts from the piece in early March by Jonathan Freedland:
“…Hamas has become an invisible player in this conflict. That’s literally true on the battlefield.”
“…[The] thousands of Hamas dead are all but unseen and rarely discussed.”
“The heartbreaking footage that comes out of Gaza...shows civilians rather than fallen fighters. Hamas combatants remain out of sight.”
"And because we stop seeing them, we stop seeing them as having agency — as if they have been merely passive in the horrific events of the last few months.”
Finally, Freedland adds the following:
“Passive is not, incidentally, how many in Gaza are coming to view the organization: there have been reports of anti-Hamas demonstrations breaking out across Gaza.”
Where, if anywhere, have you read or heard that in the media. It surprised me to read any of this in The Guardian because, overall, it has been quite critical of Israel.
As this reality pierced my journalistic consciousness, I began keeping count of how many stories completely omitted any mention of Hamas or mentioned the terrorist organization in “passing.”
The numbers increased quickly, and they didn’t include the analyses from “talking heads” on TV that discuss the war while displaying indefensible amnesia when it comes to Hamas.
Which brings us to another major media sin which has unfairly distorted the coverage of the war. I am referring to the reporting of the death toll.
One of journalism’s most important principles requires, when reporters cannot verify facts independently, that they attribute them to a source and, equally important, briefly describe the source so consumers of news can judge the credibility of the stories.
This principle has been widely and indefensibly violated consistently by the media in this war.
As I wrote this column, the death toll in Gaza stood at roughly 30,000 but that number comes from none other than the Hamas Health Ministry. Yes, the same terrorist group that conducted the savage onslaught October 7 in which civilians were beheaded, burned alive, women gang-raped, and babies riddled with gunfire.
Thus, is it really too cynical to ask that an organization that engages in such inhumanity and does so with glee, might — just might — disseminate death toll figures that are distorted as part of its propaganda?
You might recall the Hamas Ministry falsely blamed Israel for killing some 500 civilians in a bombing of a hospital. While untrue, the charge captured headlines around the world. (The New York Times issued what I described as a mealy-mouthed apology, but the damage was done.)
The media have not asked the crucial question as to the accuracy of the information it receives from Hamas, but instead embraces the statistics as being beyond reproach.
Israel’s critics as well as politicians whose constituents support Hamas jump all over the numbers and tout them as if they came from up high.
Let’s take a closer look at the various way the media report the death toll.
• Sometimes, they simply report that the numbers come from the Hamas Health Ministry. Inexcusably, they do not follow-up with, “We could not independently verify the statistics.”
• At other times, they publish the numbers without any attribution at all. A big “no, no” in journalism.
• They fail to differentiate between civilian and terrorist deaths.
• Human rights groups are not asked how they researched their totals. They are echoing the Ministry’s numbers.
• Finally, most insidious, often the numbers are attributed to “Gaza health authorities” or “Gaza health agencies.” This tells me that the respective reporters, knowing that citing Hamas’s numbers might not be considered credible, use a euphonism. There are no “health agencies” or “health authorities” in Gaza except the Ministry.
Which brings me to very crucial statistics as pointed out by Michael Oren, former Israeli ambassador to the U.S, during an interview with Jay Michaelson at The Forward.
Oren said that of some 28,000 Gazans (the number at the time of the interview) who have been killed, 12,000 were combatants and another 2,000 were killed by misfired Hamas rockets. He continued that the death ratio between civilians and the military was 1:1, while during U.S. involvement in Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria, four civilians were killed for every combatant.
None of the above is to suggest that the Gazans’ plight is not gut-wrenching, whatever the actual death toll. It is horrific. Sadly, in war, the death toll is generally higher among civilians than the military.
But, as I have written in several columns, the fault lies with Hamas, which uses Gazan civilians as shields by fighting from homes, schools, mosques, hospitals, tunnels under civilian structures, etc.
The objective of raising these two issues is to point out the frequent imbalance, simplistic and inaccurate reporting, sensationalism and, at times, deliberate bias, in the media.
Will or can it change? I am not holding my breath.
Both on television and in print, the entire emphasis has been on Israeli military operations alongside of continuous coverage of civilian casualties with an emphasis, of course, on women and children.
Seldom was Hamas even mentioned in the stories giving the impression that Israel is alone in the fight and does not face any military opposition, that the IDF was simply firing its weapons against a non-existent enemy, and causing unjust grief for civilian Gazans.
I had doubts about my conclusion and held my “computer tongue” until I read an essay in The Guardian that provided some proof of what I thought I was witnessing.
Here are some excerpts from the piece in early March by Jonathan Freedland:
“…Hamas has become an invisible player in this conflict. That’s literally true on the battlefield.”
“…[The] thousands of Hamas dead are all but unseen and rarely discussed.”
“The heartbreaking footage that comes out of Gaza...shows civilians rather than fallen fighters. Hamas combatants remain out of sight.”
"And because we stop seeing them, we stop seeing them as having agency — as if they have been merely passive in the horrific events of the last few months.”
Finally, Freedland adds the following:
“Passive is not, incidentally, how many in Gaza are coming to view the organization: there have been reports of anti-Hamas demonstrations breaking out across Gaza.”
Where, if anywhere, have you read or heard that in the media. It surprised me to read any of this in The Guardian because, overall, it has been quite critical of Israel.
As this reality pierced my journalistic consciousness, I began keeping count of how many stories completely omitted any mention of Hamas or mentioned the terrorist organization in “passing.”
The numbers increased quickly, and they didn’t include the analyses from “talking heads” on TV that discuss the war while displaying indefensible amnesia when it comes to Hamas.
Which brings us to another major media sin which has unfairly distorted the coverage of the war. I am referring to the reporting of the death toll.
One of journalism’s most important principles requires, when reporters cannot verify facts independently, that they attribute them to a source and, equally important, briefly describe the source so consumers of news can judge the credibility of the stories.
This principle has been widely and indefensibly violated consistently by the media in this war.
As I wrote this column, the death toll in Gaza stood at roughly 30,000 but that number comes from none other than the Hamas Health Ministry. Yes, the same terrorist group that conducted the savage onslaught October 7 in which civilians were beheaded, burned alive, women gang-raped, and babies riddled with gunfire.
Thus, is it really too cynical to ask that an organization that engages in such inhumanity and does so with glee, might — just might — disseminate death toll figures that are distorted as part of its propaganda?
You might recall the Hamas Ministry falsely blamed Israel for killing some 500 civilians in a bombing of a hospital. While untrue, the charge captured headlines around the world. (The New York Times issued what I described as a mealy-mouthed apology, but the damage was done.)
The media have not asked the crucial question as to the accuracy of the information it receives from Hamas, but instead embraces the statistics as being beyond reproach.
Israel’s critics as well as politicians whose constituents support Hamas jump all over the numbers and tout them as if they came from up high.
Let’s take a closer look at the various way the media report the death toll.
• Sometimes, they simply report that the numbers come from the Hamas Health Ministry. Inexcusably, they do not follow-up with, “We could not independently verify the statistics.”
• At other times, they publish the numbers without any attribution at all. A big “no, no” in journalism.
• They fail to differentiate between civilian and terrorist deaths.
• Human rights groups are not asked how they researched their totals. They are echoing the Ministry’s numbers.
• Finally, most insidious, often the numbers are attributed to “Gaza health authorities” or “Gaza health agencies.” This tells me that the respective reporters, knowing that citing Hamas’s numbers might not be considered credible, use a euphonism. There are no “health agencies” or “health authorities” in Gaza except the Ministry.
Which brings me to very crucial statistics as pointed out by Michael Oren, former Israeli ambassador to the U.S, during an interview with Jay Michaelson at The Forward.
Oren said that of some 28,000 Gazans (the number at the time of the interview) who have been killed, 12,000 were combatants and another 2,000 were killed by misfired Hamas rockets. He continued that the death ratio between civilians and the military was 1:1, while during U.S. involvement in Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria, four civilians were killed for every combatant.
None of the above is to suggest that the Gazans’ plight is not gut-wrenching, whatever the actual death toll. It is horrific. Sadly, in war, the death toll is generally higher among civilians than the military.
But, as I have written in several columns, the fault lies with Hamas, which uses Gazan civilians as shields by fighting from homes, schools, mosques, hospitals, tunnels under civilian structures, etc.
The objective of raising these two issues is to point out the frequent imbalance, simplistic and inaccurate reporting, sensationalism and, at times, deliberate bias, in the media.
Will or can it change? I am not holding my breath.
––––––––––––––––––––
Subscribe to the Legal News!
http://legalnews.com/Home/Subscription
Full access to public notices, articles, columns, archives, statistics, calendar and more
Day Pass Only $4.95!
One-County $80/year
Three-County & Full Pass also available
