By Berl Falbaum
A headline in The New York Times recently stopped me in my political commentary tracks.
It read: “Battered but Undefeated, Hamas Remains a Fighting Force in Gaza.”
Huh? Hamas a fighting force in the Gaza-Israeli war? We have heard nary a word about Hamas being a party to the conflict since a week after October 7, 2023.
Here is some of what The Times reported:
“Once an organized army, it has transformed itself into scattered groupings of fighters, focused on digging in and surviving the war, while staging ambushes of Israeli soldiers.
“Hamas, though, is still a powerful Palestinian force in Gaza (emphasis supplied) ...On the battlefield, Hamas has adopted a strategy of staging hit-and-run attacks, rather than engaging in direct combat with Israeli forces, which have a vast military advantage.
“The group has been planting explosives under roads, in residential buildings and on top of Israeli military vehicles, according to Israeli security officials.
“In recent months, Hamas’s military wing has published videos of fighters in civilian dress approaching tanks, armored personnel carriers and soldiers before firing on them and then running away.”
Surely, that is news.
Now that The Times finally devoted a little newsprint to Hamas’s role in the war, perhaps the rest of the media might follow suit.
All the mainstream media have reported is how many civilians Israel has killed in hospitals, schools, residential neighborhoods, food relief centers, etc. It was — and is — endless, whether one person or many are killed by Israel.
Deep in stories, reporters may mention that Israel “claims” — notice the verb which implies doubt — that it was attacking Hamas terrorists. That is followed by the obligatory sentence that Israel did not provide evidence of its claims.
Meanwhile “Gaza health authorities” (read Hamas) always “report” on civilian deaths and no evidence is demanded.
On the same day I was writing this column, The Times reported, “Israeli Strike Kills Gazans Sheltering in Warehouse, Local Reports Say.” Where did the “local reports” come from? Palestinian authorities. Where was the sentence that the alleged casualties could not be independently verified.
Now, let’s address the issue of civilian deaths, putting aside the number the U.S. killed in Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan, while remembering that those wars were not on U.S. soil nor was its existence at stake, nor were Japanese and German armies using civilians as shields.
In WW II, U.S. Air Force General Curtis LeMay launched firebombing raids in 67 Japanese cities, killing more than 300,000 civilians. That was before the U.S. dropped “Little Boy” and “Fat Man,” the two A-bombs. Add another estimated 200,000 deaths. Total: about half a million.
In a documentary, “Fogs of War,” the late Robert McNamara, who served as Secretary of Defense from 1961-68, said LeMay told him that if the U.S. had lost the war, it might have been charged with war crimes.
Meanwhile, in Europe the Allies leveled several German cities, deliberately targeting civilians to put pressure on the government to surrender.
Perhaps the most egregious aspect of the reporting has been ignoring Hamas’s strategy of endorsing civilian deaths — the more the better; it serves its purposes.
Early in the battle, The Wall Street Journal published emails from Yahya Sinwar, the Hamas leader killed by Israel, in which he advocated a high civilian death toll. At times, the terrorist organization even fired on its own people who were trying to flee.
Consider an eight-page bashing article on Israel in The New Yorker recently written by its editor, David Remnick. Regarding Hamas’s strategy, Remnick observes:
“The suffering of Palestinian civilians wasn’t merely a foreseeable consequence; it was an integral part of [Hamas] strategy.”
Remnick writes all of 18 words (out of about 14,000) to this facet of the war, but it is 18 more words than the rest of the media have devoted to this issue.
But — a big but — after acknowledging Hamas’s strategy of exploiting the deaths of innocent lives, Remnick immediate, in the same paragraph yet, turns his focus back on Israel by quoting Joe Biden that Israel should not be “consumed” with rage over the October 7 massacre.
Hamas’s inhumane strategy has been ignored and the bestiality of the terrorist organization glossed over, if not embraced. While the demands that Israel end the war reverberate in the media, the journalism community is mute on Hamas laying down its arms.
Former Secretary of State Antony Blinken, in the Biden administration, was the only world leader who continually made the point that the conflict could end instantly if Hamas stopped fighting.
Here is just one paragraph from The Guardian which violates a number of pretty basic principles of journalism. I am not addressing politics.
“…[M]ore than 60,000 people killed in the region, and rampant famine. Most recently, the Israeli government has continued its military offensive on Gaza City, killing dozens of Palestinians this week alone. Hundreds of thousands have been displaced from the capital since August.”
• The paper does not bother to attribute alleged death toll; nor does it mention the number of combatants killed.
• Rampant famine? Again, no attribution; simply a statement of fact and no mention that Hamas is reportedly looting food supplies.
• Israel is not fighting Hamas; it is just killing Palestinians, “dozens this week alone.”
• Hamas has no role in the fatalities or the displacement of Palestinians.
It is hard to grasp so many journalistic abuses in one paragraph. Even if you are a critic of Israel, this kind of shallow, distorted and, in many cases, biased reporting should anger you.
So, broadcasting daily heart-wrenching sound bites of suffering Palestinians without mentioning the role of Hamas, is not news; it’s propaganda. Yes, it makes good copy but it distorts and misrepresents the reality of the war.
Each incident needs to be examined with sophistication, context and, most important, balance. Charges need to checked and rechecked, sources thoroughly vetted, politics ignored and, equally important, tempering of the journalistic objective to be first and be more “controversial” and “dramatic” than the competition.
No, Israel should not be given a free pass. There is much to be investigated and questioned about some of Israel’s actions and strategies. (I called for Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu to resign or be ousted in January 2024, only three months after Hamas’s vicious butchery.)
But the story should be pursued with the highest degree of reportorial professionalism.
Given the history of the war’s coverage, I think we would be fortunate if the media just followed some very basic 101 journalistic principles.
It read: “Battered but Undefeated, Hamas Remains a Fighting Force in Gaza.”
Huh? Hamas a fighting force in the Gaza-Israeli war? We have heard nary a word about Hamas being a party to the conflict since a week after October 7, 2023.
Here is some of what The Times reported:
“Once an organized army, it has transformed itself into scattered groupings of fighters, focused on digging in and surviving the war, while staging ambushes of Israeli soldiers.
“Hamas, though, is still a powerful Palestinian force in Gaza (emphasis supplied) ...On the battlefield, Hamas has adopted a strategy of staging hit-and-run attacks, rather than engaging in direct combat with Israeli forces, which have a vast military advantage.
“The group has been planting explosives under roads, in residential buildings and on top of Israeli military vehicles, according to Israeli security officials.
“In recent months, Hamas’s military wing has published videos of fighters in civilian dress approaching tanks, armored personnel carriers and soldiers before firing on them and then running away.”
Surely, that is news.
Now that The Times finally devoted a little newsprint to Hamas’s role in the war, perhaps the rest of the media might follow suit.
All the mainstream media have reported is how many civilians Israel has killed in hospitals, schools, residential neighborhoods, food relief centers, etc. It was — and is — endless, whether one person or many are killed by Israel.
Deep in stories, reporters may mention that Israel “claims” — notice the verb which implies doubt — that it was attacking Hamas terrorists. That is followed by the obligatory sentence that Israel did not provide evidence of its claims.
Meanwhile “Gaza health authorities” (read Hamas) always “report” on civilian deaths and no evidence is demanded.
On the same day I was writing this column, The Times reported, “Israeli Strike Kills Gazans Sheltering in Warehouse, Local Reports Say.” Where did the “local reports” come from? Palestinian authorities. Where was the sentence that the alleged casualties could not be independently verified.
Now, let’s address the issue of civilian deaths, putting aside the number the U.S. killed in Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan, while remembering that those wars were not on U.S. soil nor was its existence at stake, nor were Japanese and German armies using civilians as shields.
In WW II, U.S. Air Force General Curtis LeMay launched firebombing raids in 67 Japanese cities, killing more than 300,000 civilians. That was before the U.S. dropped “Little Boy” and “Fat Man,” the two A-bombs. Add another estimated 200,000 deaths. Total: about half a million.
In a documentary, “Fogs of War,” the late Robert McNamara, who served as Secretary of Defense from 1961-68, said LeMay told him that if the U.S. had lost the war, it might have been charged with war crimes.
Meanwhile, in Europe the Allies leveled several German cities, deliberately targeting civilians to put pressure on the government to surrender.
Perhaps the most egregious aspect of the reporting has been ignoring Hamas’s strategy of endorsing civilian deaths — the more the better; it serves its purposes.
Early in the battle, The Wall Street Journal published emails from Yahya Sinwar, the Hamas leader killed by Israel, in which he advocated a high civilian death toll. At times, the terrorist organization even fired on its own people who were trying to flee.
Consider an eight-page bashing article on Israel in The New Yorker recently written by its editor, David Remnick. Regarding Hamas’s strategy, Remnick observes:
“The suffering of Palestinian civilians wasn’t merely a foreseeable consequence; it was an integral part of [Hamas] strategy.”
Remnick writes all of 18 words (out of about 14,000) to this facet of the war, but it is 18 more words than the rest of the media have devoted to this issue.
But — a big but — after acknowledging Hamas’s strategy of exploiting the deaths of innocent lives, Remnick immediate, in the same paragraph yet, turns his focus back on Israel by quoting Joe Biden that Israel should not be “consumed” with rage over the October 7 massacre.
Hamas’s inhumane strategy has been ignored and the bestiality of the terrorist organization glossed over, if not embraced. While the demands that Israel end the war reverberate in the media, the journalism community is mute on Hamas laying down its arms.
Former Secretary of State Antony Blinken, in the Biden administration, was the only world leader who continually made the point that the conflict could end instantly if Hamas stopped fighting.
Here is just one paragraph from The Guardian which violates a number of pretty basic principles of journalism. I am not addressing politics.
“…[M]ore than 60,000 people killed in the region, and rampant famine. Most recently, the Israeli government has continued its military offensive on Gaza City, killing dozens of Palestinians this week alone. Hundreds of thousands have been displaced from the capital since August.”
• The paper does not bother to attribute alleged death toll; nor does it mention the number of combatants killed.
• Rampant famine? Again, no attribution; simply a statement of fact and no mention that Hamas is reportedly looting food supplies.
• Israel is not fighting Hamas; it is just killing Palestinians, “dozens this week alone.”
• Hamas has no role in the fatalities or the displacement of Palestinians.
It is hard to grasp so many journalistic abuses in one paragraph. Even if you are a critic of Israel, this kind of shallow, distorted and, in many cases, biased reporting should anger you.
So, broadcasting daily heart-wrenching sound bites of suffering Palestinians without mentioning the role of Hamas, is not news; it’s propaganda. Yes, it makes good copy but it distorts and misrepresents the reality of the war.
Each incident needs to be examined with sophistication, context and, most important, balance. Charges need to checked and rechecked, sources thoroughly vetted, politics ignored and, equally important, tempering of the journalistic objective to be first and be more “controversial” and “dramatic” than the competition.
No, Israel should not be given a free pass. There is much to be investigated and questioned about some of Israel’s actions and strategies. (I called for Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu to resign or be ousted in January 2024, only three months after Hamas’s vicious butchery.)
But the story should be pursued with the highest degree of reportorial professionalism.
Given the history of the war’s coverage, I think we would be fortunate if the media just followed some very basic 101 journalistic principles.
––––––––––––––––––––
Subscribe to the Legal News!
https://www.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
