By Berl Falbaum
Above a story labeled “explainer,” the following “objective” headline appeared on the sites of several news outlets recently:
“Gaza death toll: How many Palestinians has Israel's campaign killed?”
Let’s try the same kind of balanced reporting for other wars in history.
How many civilians did the Allies kill in the June 6, 1944 invasion of Normandy?
How many did they kill in the following push through Europe?
Or ...
How many civilians did the U.S. kill in Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan?
Instead of the one-sided headline asking how many Palestinians have been killed by Israel in the war how about something along these lines:
(X Number) of Palestinians have been killed in the clashes between Hamas and Israeli troops.
Need one point out that Israel did not launch a campaign to kill Palestinian civilians but responded to un-imaginary butchery and savagery conducted on October 7, 2023.
As implied in my questions above, we have not seen this kind of reporting in other wars.
For instance, during World War II, as discussed in history books, Air Force Major General Curtis LeMay decimated more than 60 Japanese cities with fire bombings over five months, slaughtering and literally incinerating tens of thousands of civilians.
In the first such air attack by B-29 bombers, more than 100,000 civilians were “baked alive” in temperatures reaching 1,800 degrees Fahrenheit. Some taking refuge in canals, were “boiled to death in the searing heat.”
We won’t even mention “Fat Man” or “Litte Boy,” the two A-bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
In Europe, the Allies leveled dozens of German cities and did so by design. The objective was to have the German population revolt against Hitler. The British called it a “dehousing” strategy.
Yet, the media’s focus remained on military operations against Japan and Germany.
Or consider the following unsettling paragraph in a recent issue of The New Yorker regarding atrocities conducted by the U.S. in wartime:
“The U.S. invasion and occupation of Iraq left more than 200,000 civilians dead. It’s a numbing figure, and almost impossible to contemplate.”
And, we need to remember, the U.S. had not been attacked by Iraq nor did it face an existential threat.
None of the above is intended to excuse or defend what we generally refer to as, “collateral” damage. But the point is there needs to be, in short, context.
Regrettably, in war, civilians always pay a higher price than combatants. In World War II, the civilian death toll was two to three times that suffered in the military. (The usual number cited: 15 million combatant deaths vs. 30 to 45 million civilians.)
Back to Israel. Israel did not suddenly and for no reason launch a campaign to slaughter civilians as offending headlines and endless anti-Israel stories imply.
As we reach the sad first anniversary of the Hamas-Israeli war, the coverage of the conflict by the media can only be described as journalistically disgraceful.
In the Hamas-Israel war, the media’s daily reporting has centered — almost entirely and exclusively — on civilian deaths, and never fails to add the obligatory line, “including mostly women and children.”
Seldom, if ever, are the military battles between Hamas and Israel covered.
The media may not have noticed, when Israel conducts a raid that leads to civilian deaths, another party is firing at IDF soldiers. Could that have caused some of the casualties?
Indeed, at times, some officials reported, Hamas purposely fired at its own people, particularly when it did not want Palestinians to move to safer ground.
In many stories, Hamas is not even mentioned as a party to the conflict.
As Jonathan Freedland wrote in The Guardian:
— “... 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.”
Worse, the numbers used for civilian deaths come from no other credible and authoritative source than the Hamas Health Ministry, an arm of the terrorist organization.
Now, how can anyone question such a source?
The media have continually accepted the numbers without question as if they were carved in a holy tablet. There has been no practice of traditional journalistic skepticism.
Sometimes reporters attribute the numbers to the ministry and sometimes to “health agencies in Gaza” — there are none in Gaza except the ministry.
At times, reporters don’t even bother to attribute statistics which violates one of the most hallowed principles in journalism, and, finally, they seldom, if ever, differentiate between combatants and civilians.
Already forgotten that in May, the United Nations reduced by almost half the number of women and children killed in the war. That, for a day or two, raised questions about the veracity of Hamas’s statistics.
But that did not seem to have an effect on the media or Israel’s critics. Daily we are fed what we might call, “The Hamas Death Toll.”
As I have written several times in the last year, the suffering of Palestinians is heart-wrenching. Who cannot be moved by the videos coming out of Gaza?
But we need more sophisticated reporting on the causes of this tragedy. Yahya Sinwar, the Hamas leader, has said in emails published by The Wall Street Journal that civilian deaths are in line with Hamas’s strategy, the more deaths the better because it puts Israel on the defensive in the world.
Recently, the Times of Israel reported on a study that found, “[Hamas] obfuscates information about slain operatives, knowing that by focusing only on civilians it can assure the world’s support as it fights against Israel.”
Even relatives of slain fighters are forbidden to mourn publicly lest it attracts attention to military deaths, the report said.
Within a week after the war broke out, I wrote that Hamas had already won. I did not mean militarily but politically.
Hamas was successful with its propaganda in turning the world’s eyes away from October 7 and to the suffering of Palestinians, despite the fact that it is entirely responsible for causing this ongoing human calamity.
We might also point out the media’s silence on other humanitarian disasters such as those in the Sudan, Yemen, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and two dozen or so other wars.
I am frequently asked what can be done to facilitate more responsible and professional reporting of the war.
Not wanting to cause more depression, I’ll let readers speculate as to my answer.
————————
Berl Falbaum is a veteran journalist and author of 12 books.
Above a story labeled “explainer,” the following “objective” headline appeared on the sites of several news outlets recently:
“Gaza death toll: How many Palestinians has Israel's campaign killed?”
Let’s try the same kind of balanced reporting for other wars in history.
How many civilians did the Allies kill in the June 6, 1944 invasion of Normandy?
How many did they kill in the following push through Europe?
Or ...
How many civilians did the U.S. kill in Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan?
Instead of the one-sided headline asking how many Palestinians have been killed by Israel in the war how about something along these lines:
(X Number) of Palestinians have been killed in the clashes between Hamas and Israeli troops.
Need one point out that Israel did not launch a campaign to kill Palestinian civilians but responded to un-imaginary butchery and savagery conducted on October 7, 2023.
As implied in my questions above, we have not seen this kind of reporting in other wars.
For instance, during World War II, as discussed in history books, Air Force Major General Curtis LeMay decimated more than 60 Japanese cities with fire bombings over five months, slaughtering and literally incinerating tens of thousands of civilians.
In the first such air attack by B-29 bombers, more than 100,000 civilians were “baked alive” in temperatures reaching 1,800 degrees Fahrenheit. Some taking refuge in canals, were “boiled to death in the searing heat.”
We won’t even mention “Fat Man” or “Litte Boy,” the two A-bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
In Europe, the Allies leveled dozens of German cities and did so by design. The objective was to have the German population revolt against Hitler. The British called it a “dehousing” strategy.
Yet, the media’s focus remained on military operations against Japan and Germany.
Or consider the following unsettling paragraph in a recent issue of The New Yorker regarding atrocities conducted by the U.S. in wartime:
“The U.S. invasion and occupation of Iraq left more than 200,000 civilians dead. It’s a numbing figure, and almost impossible to contemplate.”
And, we need to remember, the U.S. had not been attacked by Iraq nor did it face an existential threat.
None of the above is intended to excuse or defend what we generally refer to as, “collateral” damage. But the point is there needs to be, in short, context.
Regrettably, in war, civilians always pay a higher price than combatants. In World War II, the civilian death toll was two to three times that suffered in the military. (The usual number cited: 15 million combatant deaths vs. 30 to 45 million civilians.)
Back to Israel. Israel did not suddenly and for no reason launch a campaign to slaughter civilians as offending headlines and endless anti-Israel stories imply.
As we reach the sad first anniversary of the Hamas-Israeli war, the coverage of the conflict by the media can only be described as journalistically disgraceful.
In the Hamas-Israel war, the media’s daily reporting has centered — almost entirely and exclusively — on civilian deaths, and never fails to add the obligatory line, “including mostly women and children.”
Seldom, if ever, are the military battles between Hamas and Israel covered.
The media may not have noticed, when Israel conducts a raid that leads to civilian deaths, another party is firing at IDF soldiers. Could that have caused some of the casualties?
Indeed, at times, some officials reported, Hamas purposely fired at its own people, particularly when it did not want Palestinians to move to safer ground.
In many stories, Hamas is not even mentioned as a party to the conflict.
As Jonathan Freedland wrote in The Guardian:
— “... 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.”
Worse, the numbers used for civilian deaths come from no other credible and authoritative source than the Hamas Health Ministry, an arm of the terrorist organization.
Now, how can anyone question such a source?
The media have continually accepted the numbers without question as if they were carved in a holy tablet. There has been no practice of traditional journalistic skepticism.
Sometimes reporters attribute the numbers to the ministry and sometimes to “health agencies in Gaza” — there are none in Gaza except the ministry.
At times, reporters don’t even bother to attribute statistics which violates one of the most hallowed principles in journalism, and, finally, they seldom, if ever, differentiate between combatants and civilians.
Already forgotten that in May, the United Nations reduced by almost half the number of women and children killed in the war. That, for a day or two, raised questions about the veracity of Hamas’s statistics.
But that did not seem to have an effect on the media or Israel’s critics. Daily we are fed what we might call, “The Hamas Death Toll.”
As I have written several times in the last year, the suffering of Palestinians is heart-wrenching. Who cannot be moved by the videos coming out of Gaza?
But we need more sophisticated reporting on the causes of this tragedy. Yahya Sinwar, the Hamas leader, has said in emails published by The Wall Street Journal that civilian deaths are in line with Hamas’s strategy, the more deaths the better because it puts Israel on the defensive in the world.
Recently, the Times of Israel reported on a study that found, “[Hamas] obfuscates information about slain operatives, knowing that by focusing only on civilians it can assure the world’s support as it fights against Israel.”
Even relatives of slain fighters are forbidden to mourn publicly lest it attracts attention to military deaths, the report said.
Within a week after the war broke out, I wrote that Hamas had already won. I did not mean militarily but politically.
Hamas was successful with its propaganda in turning the world’s eyes away from October 7 and to the suffering of Palestinians, despite the fact that it is entirely responsible for causing this ongoing human calamity.
We might also point out the media’s silence on other humanitarian disasters such as those in the Sudan, Yemen, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and two dozen or so other wars.
I am frequently asked what can be done to facilitate more responsible and professional reporting of the war.
Not wanting to cause more depression, I’ll let readers speculate as to my answer.
————————
Berl Falbaum is a veteran journalist and author of 12 books.
