Showing posts with label Media Bias. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Media Bias. Show all posts

Monday, May 13, 2024

Media Review: New York Times answers the question, why do American students choose Aljazeera?

    Monday, May 13, 2024   No comments

The New York Times, which has been accused of biased reporting on the war in Gaza even by its own contributors, and and whose editors instruct its journalists about which words to use, is now providing some answers as to why young Americans, especially students, are using other media outlets, like  Aljazeera to learn about what is happening in Palestine

Although Aljazeera is a major alternative media outlet, its connection to the State of Qatar, make its influence limited, opening the door to new media sources, like Quds News Network (an English channel) and Palestine Online (an Arabic channel),  that rely on social media platforms, like Telegram, to broadcast globally.

The paper argues that in light of the student movement in American universities to stop the Israeli war on Gaza, the reluctance of new generations in the United States to follow major Western media outlets has emerged, and their skepticism about their faithfulness in conveying the truth of what is happening.

The New York Times followed this trend among student protesters who recently held sit-ins at dozens of American universities, to shed light on their objections to the Western media, and at the same time their interest in the Aljazeera network, which has become their main source of information regarding the war on Gaza.

“Aljazeera is my go-to place for reliable storytelling,” says Nick Wilson, a student at Cornell University.

The newspaper explains that the protesting students expressed their dissatisfaction with the traditional American media’s coverage of the war, including the New York Times itself, CNN, the Atlantic, and others.

NYT explains that despite the widespread coverage of the war by these networks, students believe that they do not hold Israel responsible - to a sufficient extent - for the killing of Palestinians and do not verify the validity of what Israeli officials say, and that their coverage of student protests focused too much on anti-Semitism in universities instead From Islamophobia.

Related to Aljazeera being in the news, confirming the connection between governments and media outlets, the Israeli government banned a number of media outlets including Aljazeera.

The NYT noted that Israel's recent closure of Aljazeera's offices has strengthened the network's standing in the hearts of the protesting American students.

Benjamin Netanyahu's government closed Aljazeera's offices on May 5, a decision that was widely condemned by international press unions and human rights organizations as an attack on press freedom and an attempt to silence Aljazeera because of its coverage of the war.

Reactions continued denouncing the Israeli government's decision to close Aljazeera's offices in Israel, amid confirmation that the decision aims to silence Al Jazeera because of its coverage of the war on Gaza.

The United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights expressed its regret at the Israeli Cabinet’s decision to close the Aljazeera office.

While the Commission stressed that freedom of expression is a basic human right, it urged Israel to rescind its decision, stressing that free and independent media are necessary to ensure transparency and accountability.

For his part, the UN rapporteur on the right to housing said that Israel's decision to close Aljazeera once again denies its claims that it is a democratic state, describing the decision as "the reaction of a terrified regime that fears freedom."

Reporters Without Borders also strongly condemned the Israeli government's unanimous vote to stop the work of Aljazeera in Israel.

The organization said in her account on the “X” platform that what she described as the blatantly repressive legislation to stop the work of Aljazeera aims to silence it because of its coverage of the war on Gaza.

It pointed out that the move indicates unacceptable censorship against the last media outlets that can report events in Gaza.

The international organization also called for the repeal of the law passed by the Israeli Parliament banning foreign media broadcasts in Israel, primarily targeting Aljazeera.


Friday, May 03, 2024

Media Review: “What is worse: Israel’s lies about Gaza or amplifying these lies by supporters?”

    Friday, May 03, 2024   No comments

To close this week, our media review highlights an article in UK media that focused on a theme our readers should be quite familiar--the fake stories that were amplified by political leaders and Western media about the war on Gaza are many. The problem has been the lack of retractions by the media, a mere tweet often appears to be enough, in the view of their editors and publishers, to absolve them of any responsibility for the injuries and harm (including deaths in a couple of cases), they have caused.

We begin today's media tour with an article published by Mehdi Hassan in the British newspaper The Guardian, entitled "What is worse, Israel's lies about Gaza or its Western backers who are repeating them?"

Hassan begins his article by quoting an Italian proverb that says, “If a man deceives me once, it is not my fault, but it is my fault if he deceives me twice.”

Mehdi Hassan says, “Since the horrific attack that occurred on October 7, the far-right Israeli government and its army have deceived Western politicians and journalists, not once, not twice, but several times.”

He adds that there are many lies and distortions that must be traced, including “the story of the forty children who were beheaded by Hamas,” which “did not happen.”

Hassan recalls that, in his opinion, there was no hideout under Al-Shifa Hospital, and the list hanging on the wall of Al-Rantisi Hospital did not display the names of those detained by Hamas, but rather just the days of the week in Arabic.

Hassan asks about those atrocities that the Israeli forces denied committing - out loud - and then revealed that they were responsible, according to the writer, who considered that there are “examples of this, such as the flour massacre in February, the bombing of the refugee convoy last October, and the attack White phosphorus in southern Lebanon in October as well.

But Hassan believes, according to him, that “there is no Israeli lie more harmful, destructive and deadly than the one that claimed that UNRWA and its employees had colluded with Hamas and participated in the attack on October 7.”

He comments on the question, “Why was this the most harmful lie?” Then he answers: “You have helped deepen a devastating and ongoing man-made famine inside the Gaza Strip.”

As a result, Mahdi says, 16 donor countries, including the United States, the main funder of UNRWA, suspended about $450 million in aid provided to the agency.

He added that "Israel starved the people of Gaza," criticizing "the fools who helped it justify this."

Hassan explains that the parties funding the Israeli file against UNRWA were warned that it contained only “false and unproven allegations,” but - according to Hassan - they trusted Israel.

The author continues by saying that many countries have resumed their funding to UNRWA, including the German government, which is the agency’s second largest source of funding, after an independent review of UNRWA’s work concluded that the agency’s work “remains pivotal in providing life-saving humanitarian assistance and basic social services.”

Hassan confirms that the independent review stated that Israel has not yet provided evidence to support these allegations, so it was, once again, “a lie from Israel.”

The writer says that, worst of all, is the statement made by Anthony Blinken, the Democratic Secretary of State, on January 29, when he admitted that “the United States did not have the ability to investigate the allegations itself.” Despite this, Washington went ahead Describing the unverified Israeli allegations as “highly credible.”

He added, "Blinken has not yet apologized for his false claim or even retracted it."

Saturday, April 27, 2024

Media Matters: Elon Musk, owner of "X", suspends the account of Mandela's grandson

    Saturday, April 27, 2024   No comments

 In a total tone-deafness, and lack of awareness of the symbolism and reality, the former white settler in South Africa and self-declared free speech absolutist, Elon Musk, suspended the account of the nephew of Nelson Mandela, South Africa’s freedom icon, without even burdening himself with an explanation—although the reasons are obvious.

Social Communication Platform X (formerly Twitter), Nkosi Zwelivelile Mandela account, grandson of the late President of South Africa Nelson Mandela، After his statements in support of the "International Fleet of Freedom", which is to be sailed from Turkey within days, to break the siege on Gaza Strip.

Mandela had arrived in Istanbul at the beginning of the week to attend the fifth conference of the Jerusalem International Parliamentary Forum, and to support preparations for the International Freedom Fleet in Istanbul.

 Mandela attended the press conference of the International Freedom Fleet, which is made up of NGOs from 12 countries last week, before expressing his support for the fleet and breaking the siege on Gaza, through several publications on the platform "X".

Friday, April 26, 2024

US Government: Infants were placed in the oven and cooked alive

    Friday, April 26, 2024   No comments

When the president of the United States, Biden,  amplified the fake story of 40 babies beheaded by Hamas, some excused his actions by claiming that he was duped by Israel intelligence to ascertain his unwavering support for the war Israel intended to unleash. 

With another US government official making a similar and even more shocking allegation, amplifying another fake story, that excuse becomes untenable.  

The third in line in the order of succession in the US government, the speaker of the House of Representatives, Johnson, on the same "trusted" news outlet that propagated the beheadings, CNN, repeated a story that was first made by some Israel person, Eli Beer, speaking at the Republican group’s summit in Las Vegas on October 28, that were later debunked by more than one investigative reports. Johnson, on that basis, claimed that Hamas "placed infants in the oven and cooked them alive". 


Sunday, April 21, 2024

Media Matters: Clash of views about Gaza, Palestine, human rights abuses, and Iranian retaliation on attack on its diplomatic mission in Syria

    Sunday, April 21, 2024   No comments

One of the most representative clashes between two worldviews: Iranian worldview versus Western worldview as represented in Piers Morgan's interview, debate with Iranian Professor Seyed Mohammad Marandi.

Morgan repeating the fabricated story of 40 babies beheaded by Hamas, to justify to mass killings in Gaza, and Mirandi referencing the investigative journalists and NGO reports that challenged the narrative of beheadings, and finding that Israeli forces have committed sexual violence and torture against Palestinians, turned Morgan flustered and rude. 

The interview is available on a number of Internet sites, and embedded from a couple of sites below.


Tuesday, April 16, 2024

New York Times tells its journalists which words to use when covering the war on Gaza

    Tuesday, April 16, 2024   No comments

According to a leaked memo, The New York Times restricts its journalists from covering the war on Gaza. The New York Times has instructed journalists covering the Israeli war on the Gaza Strip to restrict the use of the terms “genocide” and “ethnic cleansing,” and to avoid using the phrase “occupied territories” when describing the Palestinian territories, according to a copy of an internal memo obtained by The Intercept. American.

According to the site, the New York Times memo also directs journalists not to use the word Palestine except in very rare cases, and to stay away from the term “refugee camps” to describe the places to which Palestinians have historically been displaced within the Gaza Strip, who fled from other parts of Palestine during the Arab-Israeli wars. Previous.

It is noteworthy that the United Nations recognizes the areas to which Palestinians were displaced as camps housing hundreds of thousands of registered refugees.

The memo, written by New York Times Standards Editor Susan Wesling, international editor Philip Ban, and others, provides guidance on some of the terms and other issues that have imposed themselves on the scene since the start of the Israeli war on the Gaza Strip last October.

While the document is presented as a blueprint for maintaining journalistic principles of objectivity when dealing with the war on Gaza, several New York Times journalists told The Intercept that some of its contents provide evidence of the newspaper adopting the Israeli narrative.

The website quoted a source in the New York Times newsroom - who requested anonymity for fear of being held accountable - saying that the matter “seems professional and logical if you do not have knowledge of the historical context of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, but if you do know, it will be clear how much it identifies with the Israeli narrative.” ".

The Intercept noted that the guidelines were first distributed to New York Times journalists last November, and were updated regularly over the following months.

On March 14, demonstrators supporting the Palestinian cause stormed the building of the New York Times newspaper in protest against its bias towards Israel in the ongoing war on the Gaza Strip. This is the second storming, as pro-Palestinian demonstrators had previously occupied the newspaper’s lobby on November 11, demanding an immediate cessation. Because of the Israeli aggression on Gaza, they accused the newspaper of bias towards Israel in its coverage of the war on the Gaza Strip.

The deliberate use of key words and adjectives by Western media, and all media outlets for that matter, is and established fact. 

The language used by the media became a reflexive way of describing the events. CNN consistently describes the Oct. 7 attack as "brutal" and "terrorist, but uses no adjectives to describe Israel's retaliation, for example.

Western media will add the adjective “brutal” when talking about Hamas’ attack on Oct. 7, but will use “war in Gaza” without attributing who is waging the war and what kind of war it is, which is brutal, destructive, and genocidal according to NGOs, many governments’ officials, and the International Court of Justice.

During the same time period, Western media used the phrase "Hamas' brutal" at least 554,000 times; whereas the "war in Gaza" was mentioned 33,900,000 times without any adjectives or qualifications despite the heavy loss of life and structures--a war that was described by independent observers, including the same media outlets who use this biased language, as unprecedented in the number and size of weapons dropped in the densely populated area just in in the first three weeks.


News media platforms’ use of guidelines, algorithms of sort, to create an acceptable narrative for their audience, financiers, shareholders, or governments is no secret nor is it practiced by limited, marginal media platforms. Journalism is a profession that teaches people who work in the field how to use words the same way a soldier is trained to use weapons.

Many people who believe in the need for free press to inform the public thought that the best model is the creation of media platforms that are not beholden to anyone. They thought a structure where a media outlet is guaranteed funding from the government with full and complete editorial independence is the way to go. This is the model of the British BBC and the American NPR. However, a close examination of the editorial policies and practices would reveal that even this model is still controlled by politics, ideology, or leadership still. The recent revelation about NPR is a good lesson in understanding the synergy between politics and journalism. Here is some reporting about the struggles inthe NPR organization.


In the letter published on Free Press, NPR’s senior business editor Uri Berliner claimed Americans no longer trust NPR – which is partly publicly funded – because of its lack of “viewpoint diversity” and its embrace of diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) initiatives.

Berliner wrote that “an open-minded spirit no longer exists within NPR, and now, predictably, we don’t have an audience that reflects America”. He acknowledged that NPR’s audience had always tilted left, but was now no longer able to make any claim to ideological neutrality.

In the piece on Free Press, a site run by Bari Weiss, a former opinion editor at the New York Times, Berliner noted that in 2011 the public broadcaster’s audience identified as 26% conservative, 23% as middle of the road and 37% liberal. Last year it identified as 11% very or somewhat conservative, 21% as middle of the road, and 67% very or somewhat liberal.


Tuesday, March 26, 2024

Media Review: The New York Times debunks its own reporting on alleged sexual assaults in Kibbutzim by Hamas on October 7

    Tuesday, March 26, 2024   No comments

The US newspaper "The New York Times" is reporting about a new video that demolishes the story of the alleged sexual assault, which was previously reported by the same newspaper--The New York Times, in which it alleged that Hamas committed "crimes of sexual violence and rape on the 7th of last October."

The newspaper referred to a previous claim by an Israeli military medic, in which he claimed that “two teenage girls, killed in the October 7 attack, were subjected to sexual assault.”

The New York Times reported that the unnamed medic, who is from an Israeli commando unit (and served as the source of the allegation), was among dozens of people who were interviewed in an article published by the newspaper on December 28, which dealt with “sexual violence on the 7th of May.” October". He claimed that he discovered "the bodies of two partially clothed girls in a house in the Kibbutz settlement (Be'eri) with signs of sexual violence."

However, now the newspaper reports about footage taken by an Israeli soldier who was in “Be’eri” on October 7, and which it reviewed, refuting this narrative. The paper explained that this footage shows “the bodies of three female victims, fully clothed and with no clear signs of sexual violence in a house where a number of residents believe the assaults allegedly occurred.”

The newspaper quoted the settlers as saying, “there was no talk about the killing of two teenage girls in any other house in Be’eri.” Accordingly, the settlers concluded from the video that “the girls were not subjected to sexual assault.”

The newspaper referred to what was said by Nili Bar-Sinai, a member of a kibbutz group, who researched allegations of “sexual assault” at home, and said that “this story is false,” denying the existence of victims of sexual assaults.

On March 4, the spokesman for Kibbutz Be’eri, Michal Paikin, denied the accounts contained in the report published by the New York Times in December of last year, under the title “Screams Without Words,” which reported it contains allegations that Hamas used “sexual violence as a weapon on October 7,” according to the newspaper’s description.

In his statements to the US website The Intercept, the spokesman for Kibbutz Be'eri, an agricultural community within the Gaza Strip, refuted the accounts reported by the NYT newspaper.

Kibbutz Be'eri spokesman Michal Paikin cast doubt on "the graphic, highly detailed claims of the Israeli Special Forces medic, who served as the source of the allegation, and whose claims were published in the New York Times, the Washington Post, and CNN" and other media.

It should be noted that while reporting on the alleged sexual violence committed by Palestinians was extensive and persistent in western media outlets, UN reported sexual violence committed by Israeli officers, which US officials seem to confirm recenlty as well as by UN experts, went underreported or unreported. Researchers have also noted that when allegations of serious abuses or violations committed by armed forces of Western States are reported, Western media will go beyond due diligence to verify the information and sometimes refute it through resource-heavy investigations. However, when instances of alleged abuse by at the hands of non-Western actors are reported, Western media will report it without due diligence checks. The reporting of the fake story about Hamas beheading 40 babies and other atrocities, which was spread at the highest level of government and by mainstream media outlets is a good example of this media bias.

Thursday, February 29, 2024

Media Review: Bearing False Witness--New York Times, Western Media

    Thursday, February 29, 2024   No comments

Journalism (mass communication) is the fourth branch of government. As to how much power this fourth branch of government has, that depends on the circumstances and events being covered. During war times, this fourth branch of government is as powerful as the armed forces, the most potent state instrument in the hand of the first branch of government. That is because a war cannot be won without a powerful narrative that justify it and motivate soldiers to fight in it.

In the wars involving majority-Muslim countries and when covering events involving Muslims in genral, Western media often skips the due diligence protocols and releases questionable stories as long as such stories fit the narrative needed for winning the war or not release critical information that may prevent winning the war.

After (and during) the US illegal invasion of Iraq in 2003, not only did the New York Times withheld information about the US torture programs for more than a year and half, but the paper methodically refused to use the word “torture” to describe the programs when writing about them as reported by Colin Kalmbachera in 2018. It was not until 2014 that the New York Times decided to “use the word “torture” to describe incidents in which we know for sure that interrogators inflicted pain on a prisoner in an effort to get information,” when ordered by NYT’s executive editor, Dean Baquet. The withholding of evidence of torture programs is likely to have continued longer if it were not for Wikileaks data dump that brought that information to the public. A person involved in Wikileaks, Julian Assange, is sought by the US government on espionage charges. In 2019, the UN Special Rapporteur on torture, Nils Melzer, stated that “while the US Government prosecutes Mr. Assange for publishing information about serious human rights violations, including torture and murder, the officials responsible for these crimes continue to enjoy impunity.”

During this ongoing war in Gaza, we are now learning that news stories that may have facilitated and justified the “plausible genocide” committed by the state of Israel, as found by the International Court of Justice in its provisional injunctions in the case brought by South Africa, these stories were fake stories, and many were based on secret government agents.

The New York Times is facing an ethical dilemma that was behind the launch of an internal investigation and review of the author of the article “Screams Without Words: How Hamas Used Sexual Violence as a Weapon on October 7,” which was published on December 28 by Israeli journalist Anat Schwartz. The investigation began after the newspaper found that Schwartz had liked posts on social media platforms calling on Israel to execute Palestinians and turn Gaza into a “slaughterhouse.”

Anat Schwartz wrote a total of seven articles for the New York Times, all of which except one, focus on the sexual violence against women angle that captured the mind of the Western public at the beginning of the war are what gave cover to the rage of the Israeli killing machine that has been going on for months. All seven stories are still published here,, as of this writing.

The “independent” Israeli journalist, who began working with the American newspaper after the operation of October 7, 2023, is being reviewed by the newspaper because she liked posts on social media that showed support for the genocide committed by Israeli forces, including posts that called for the transformation of Gaza to a “slaughterhouse” and promoting the lie of “40 headless children.” The New York Times’ social media policy prohibits its journalists from expressing partisan opinions or endorsing political views.

During her work at the newspaper, Schwartz’s reporting focused on highlighting “Israel” as a victim, especially writing fabrications about sexual violence that she claims was committed by Palestinians. It also supported publications that said
Westerners should be “afraid” and should believe that “Hamas” is like ISIS. Schwartz’s work has faced internal criticism, leading to the removal of an episode of The Daily podcast related to the original story. Schwartz quickly deactivated her account on the X platform for a short period to remove the posts she liked after users noticed them. But the matter had already turned into a scandal and the newspaper’s management was forced to take action.

Anat Schwartz was not a reporter or journalist before last October 7. She is a filmmaker who was suddenly hired by the New York Times last October. More evidence has emerged online that Schwartz also served in Israeli military intelligence. Her assistant in writing two of the articles was her nephew, Adam Sella. As the scandal escalated, one of the main media outlets in Israel, Ynet, wrote about Anat Schwartz, quoting Israeli sources who feared that the New York Times’ move against Schwartz would affect the Israeli narrative, and that the Israeli government was pressuring the American newspaper to conceal these facts.

The first person to discover that Schwartz liked racist posts calling for the extermination of the people of Gaza was an account on the X platform called zei_squirrel on the 24th of February. Then, the Internet began investigating Schwartz’s background and searching for any of her digital traces on the web. It was  revealed that she has been working at the “Israeli Public Broadcasting Corporation” since 2021, and continued her work while writing the fabrications published by the New York Times.  This means that the New York Times was aware of all these matters, but decided to rely on a film director, and a former soldier in Israeli intelligence, to write propaganda content that the paper published as reliable, vetted information.

Now, the New York Times is claiming that it is investigating Schwartz, not for the content it published, but for violating the newspaper’s rules regarding how to appear on social media platforms.

The bias does not stop there. Western media was fully saturated with news stories after the Israeli government presented a made-for-drama show about the sexual violence allegedly committed by Hamas. The New York Times alone published six stories on the matter by the same individual reporter. However, when two independent UN bodies produced evidence documenting sexual violence committed against Palestinian women and girls at the hands of Israeli officers, Western media ignores it or provide little coverage of it. The complicity of Western media in genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity is what enables these crimes to continue to happen. Importantly, the prominent media outlets’ biased coverage  provides the first draft of history, and often the final draft of it.

Adapted from The Way Western Media Whitewashes Illegal Invasions And Torture And Enables Genocide

Monday, February 05, 2024

Media review: CNN faces pressure from its employees because of its bias towards Israel

    Monday, February 05, 2024   No comments

The Guardian newspaper said that the American CNN network is facing violent reactions from its employees over editorial policies that they say adopt the Israeli narrative, while censoring the viewpoints of Palestinians in the network’s coverage of the war on Gaza.

Journalists in CNN newsrooms in the United States and abroad say the broadcast was skewed by administration rules and a topic approval process that resulted in very partial coverage of the October 7 attack and the Israeli war in Gaza.

“Most of the news since the war began, no matter how accurate the initial reporting, has been skewed by systemic and institutional bias within the network toward Israel,” a CNN employee said, adding that CNN’s coverage of the Israeli war on Gaza amounts to journalistic malpractice.

According to accounts from six network employees in multiple newsrooms, and more than a dozen internal memos and emails obtained by The Guardian, daily news decisions are shaped by a flow of direction from CNN headquarters in Atlanta, Georgia, which sets strict guidelines on coverage.

They include severe restrictions on quoting the Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas) and conveying Palestinian views, while Israeli government statements are taken at face value. In addition, every war story or news item coming from the Jerusalem office must be deleted.

The American network's journalists say that the tone of the coverage was set by its new editor-in-chief and CEO, Mark Thompson, as some employees are concerned about Thompson's willingness to tolerate external attempts to influence coverage, as Thompson previously served as director general of the British Broadcasting Corporation, and was accused of caving in to government pressure. In a number of positions, including calling for the dismissal of one of the network’s most prominent correspondents in Jerusalem in 2005.

In early November, David Lindsay, the network's director of news standards and practices, issued a directive banning the publication of most Hamas statements, describing them as "inflammatory speech and propaganda."

CNN sources admitted that no interviews had been conducted with Hamas and its leaders since the October 7 attack. CNN correspondent Sarah Synder faced criticism for repeating the alleged Israeli story that Hamas beheaded 40 children at the beginning of the Al-Aqsa Flood operation. The correspondent later apologized for the story.

One of the network's journalists told the Guardian that there are selected individuals who edit all reports with an institutional pro-Israel bias, and often use language and phrases to absolve the Israeli army of responsibility for its crimes in Gaza, and downplay the number of Palestinian deaths and Israeli attacks.

While other employees said that some journalists with experience covering war and news in the region are avoiding assignments related to Israel, as they believe that they will not be free to tell the whole story.

One employee said there is a lot of internal conflict and opposition within the network, and some employees are looking to leave.

Tuesday, January 09, 2024

Media Review: How did major American newspapers cover the Gaza war?

    Tuesday, January 09, 2024   No comments

 A quantitative analysis conducted by the American website "The Intercept" concluded that the coverage of major newspapers in America in the first six weeks of the attack on Gaza showed a strong bias in favor of Israel.

The website said that coverage of the Israeli war on Gaza by the New York Times, Washington Post, and Los Angeles Times was consistently biased against the Palestinians.

The website explained in its report that the print media, which plays an influential role in shaping American public opinion on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, did not pay much attention to the unprecedented impact of the Israeli blockade and bombing campaign on both children and journalists in the Gaza Strip.

Disproportionate coverage

He said that major American newspapers disproportionately highlighted Israeli deaths in the conflict, used emotional language to describe the killing of Israelis, did not do so with Palestinian deaths, and provided unbalanced coverage of anti-Semitic actions in the United States, while largely ignoring anti-Muslim racism in the wake of the attack. October 7th in Israel.

Pro-Palestinian activists accused major newspapers of bias with Israel, with the New York Times witnessing protests in front of its Manhattan headquarters over its coverage of the Gaza war, an accusation supported by The Intercept's analysis.

The Intercept's open source analysis focuses on the first six weeks of the conflict, during which 14,800 Palestinians, including more than 6,000 children, were killed by Israel's bombing of Gaza.

The Intercept collected more than a thousand articles from the New York Times, Washington Post, and Los Angeles Times about Israel's war on Gaza, and recorded the uses of some key terms and the context in which they were used.

Serious defect

She said that the statistics reveal a serious flaw in the way Israeli and pro-Israel figures are covered versus Palestinian and pro-Palestinian voices, with uses that favor Israeli narratives over Palestinian narratives.

She commented that this anti-Palestinian bias in the print media combined with a similar survey of US television news conducted by the analysis writers last month, found a wider disparity.

The risks of this routine devaluation of Palestinian lives cannot be small. With the death toll rising in Gaza, entire cities flattened and uninhabitable for years, and entire families wiped out, the US government wields enormous influence as Israel's main sponsor and arms supplier. The media's exposure to the conflict means that there are fewer political downsides to American support for Israel.

A bleak picture for the Palestinian side

Coverage from the first six weeks of the war paints a bleak picture of the Palestinian side, according to the analysis, one that makes humanizing the Palestinians, and thus eliciting US sympathy for the Palestinians, more difficult.

The site explained that it searched for all articles containing related words (such as “Palestinian,” “Gaza,” “Israeli,” etc.) in the three aforementioned newspapers. He analyzed every sentence in every article and counted the number of specific terms.

He said that the coverage survey he conducted contained 4 main results:

Disproportionate coverage of deaths

In all three newspapers, the phrase “Israeli” or “Israel” appears more often than “Palestinian” or variations thereof, even as Palestinian deaths exceed those of Israelis. For all deaths, Palestinians are mentioned once, and for every Israeli death, Israelis are mentioned 8 times, or an average of 16 times more for each Palestinian death.

"Slaughter" the Israelis, not the Palestinians

The Intercept reported that highly emotional terms for killing civilians such as “massacre,” “massacre,” and “horrific” were almost exclusively reserved for Israelis killed by Palestinians, and not the other way around.

He added that editors and reporters used the term "massacre" to describe the killing of Israelis versus Palestinians 60 to 1, and used the word "massacre" to describe the killing of Israelis versus Palestinians 125 to 2. The word "horrific" was used to describe the killing of Israelis versus Palestinians 36 to 4.

The Washington Post used the word “massacres” several times in its reporting to describe what happened in the October 7 attack. “President Biden faces mounting pressure from lawmakers in both parties to punish Iran after the Hamas massacre.”

In a Washington Post story published on November 13 about how the Israeli siege and bombing had claimed the lives of 1 in 200 Palestinians, the word “massacre” or “massacre” was not used once. Palestinians were simply “killed” or “died,” often in the passive voice.

For children and journalists

The website also noted that only two headlines out of more than 1,100 news articles in the study mentioned the word “children” related to the children of Gaza. In a notable exception, The New York Times ran front-page stories in late November about the historic pace of killing of Palestinian women and children, even though the headline did not mention children or women.

He added that although Israel's war on Gaza is perhaps the bloodiest for children, most of whom are Palestinian, in modern history, there is no mention of the word "children" and related terms in the titles of the articles included in the study.

Gaza and Ukraine

While the war on Gaza was one of the bloodiest wars in modern history for journalists, most of them Palestinian, the word “journalists” and its repetitions such as “reporters” and “photographers” appear in only 9 headlines out of more than 1,100 articles studied. Approximately 48 Palestinian journalists were killed due to Israeli bombing at the time of the truce, and today, the death toll of Palestinian journalists has exceeded 100. However, only 4 of 9 articles containing the words journalist and correspondent were about Arab correspondents.

The Intercept commented that the lack of coverage of the unprecedented killings of children and journalists, groups that usually elicit sympathy from Western media, is conspicuous. By comparison, more Palestinian children died in the first week of the Gaza bombing than in the entire first year of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, yet the New York Times, Washington Post, and Los Angeles Times all published sympathetic stories highlighting the Ukraine war.

The website commented that the asymmetry in how children are covered is both qualitative and quantitative. On October 13, the Los Angeles Times published an Associated Press report saying: “The Gaza Ministry of Health said on Friday that 1,799 people had been killed in the territory, including more than 580 under the age of 18 and 351 women. Last Saturday's Hamas attack led to the deaths of more than 1,300 people in Israel, including women, children, and young music festival-goers. Note that Israeli youth are referred to as children while Palestinian youth are described as under 18 years of age.

During discussions about prisoner exchanges, this repeated refusal to refer to Palestinians as children was most evident, with the New York Times in one instance referring to “Israeli women and children” being exchanged for “Palestinian women and minors.”

A Washington Post report published on November 21 announcing the truce agreement removed the phrase “Palestinian women and children” entirely: “President Joe Biden said in a statement Tuesday night that the deal to release 50 women and children held hostage by Hamas in Gaza, in exchange for 150 A Palestinian prisoner held by Israel. The brief did not mention Palestinian women and children at all.

Coverage of hate in the United States

Likewise, when it comes to how the conflict in Gaza contributes to hatred in the United States, major newspapers pay more attention to anti-Semitic attacks than to those directed against Muslims, The Intercept continued. Overall, there has been a disproportionate focus on racism toward Jewish people, versus racism targeting Muslims, Arabs, or those perceived as such.

During the period of the Intercept study, the three newspapers studied mentioned anti-Semitism more than Islamophobia (549 vs. 79), and this was before the “campus anti-Semitism” debate created by Republicans in Congress.

Despite many high-profile instances of both anti-Semitism and anti-Muslim racism during the survey period, 87% mentioned discrimination around anti-Semitism, compared to 13% mentioned Islamophobia, including related terms.

When major newspapers fail

In general, the killings of Palestinians in Gaza do not receive as much coverage in terms of scope or emotional weight as the killings of Israelis on October 7. These killings are often presented as arbitrarily high. Hamas' killings of Israeli civilians are consistently portrayed as part of the group's strategy, while killings of Palestinian civilians are covered almost as if they were a series of one-time mistakes committed thousands of times, despite many operations indicating Israel's intent to harm civilians and infrastructure. Civilian. The result is that the three major newspapers rarely gave the Palestinians humanitarian coverage.

Despite the biased coverage of Israel

Despite this disparity, opinion polls show a shift in sympathy toward the Palestinians and away from Israel among Democrats, with huge generational divisions driven in part by stark differences in news sources. In general, we find that young people get their information from TikTok, YouTube, Instagram, and Twitter, while older Americans get their information from print media and news.

The Intercept said biased coverage in major newspapers and mainstream television news affects public perceptions of the war and directs viewers toward a distorted view of the conflict, and this has led pro-Israel critics to blame pro-Palestinian views on social media “misinformation.”

He concluded by saying that, however, an analysis of both print media and television news shows that if any group of media consumers gets a biased image it is because of the news broadcast by the established media outlets in the United States.

Tuesday, November 21, 2023

Media review: On CNN, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak, 'Israel built the tunnels under Gaza hospital'

    Tuesday, November 21, 2023   No comments

Former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak, just like that, dismantled the Israeli narrative that Hamas built the tunnel systems under hospitals and is using it as command-and-control centers--justifying Israel troops attack on hospitals and other protected places in international law. 

Ehud Barak revealed confirmed in an interview with CNN’s Amanpour, who was clearly surprised by the disclosure and tried to give him a chance to take what he said back… he disclosed that the tunnel complex beneath Al-Shifa Hospital was constructed by Israel when Gaza was under Israeli occupation decades ago.

Conflating news and propaganda is becoming a problem of credibility for both politicians and media outlets. First, it was the lie about “40 babies beheaded by Hamas.” Then Israel's claim that Hamas targeted and killed party goers on Oct. 7, only to learn later that Hamas did not know about the concert and that some Israelis were killed by Israeli troops who deployed a protocol that is mean to kill Israelis if they were in the process of being taken hostage. All in all, mainstream media are struggling to rebuild public trust.

Wednesday, July 26, 2023

Colonial media practices: The blatant double standards will mark the fall of the "free world" discourse on previously-universalized values

    Wednesday, July 26, 2023   No comments

Western governments have used the pillars of their modern civilization to shame and intimidate other communities to submit their systems of dominance. Human rights, free press, free speech, individual rights were all used as universal values that legitimized western interventionism. It worked because many thinkers and leaders in the Global south communities actually bought into this discourse. However, with new technologies that enabled impoverished communities to build their own institutions, and enjoy a degree of autonomy, the Western discourse revealed its superficial commitment to freedom of speech and freedom of the press. Sanctions and bans became a favorite instrument in the hands of Western states to punish speech they did not like. Suddenly freedom of speech became limited; they just needed to find the context for banning it. That is now creating a problem for the so-called free world.

Monday, May 29, 2023

Foreign Policy asks: "What drives the Western media to filter out a lot of international news or to neglect it completely?"

    Monday, May 29, 2023   No comments

The American magazine "Foreign Policy" revealed the role of the media in concealing massacres around the world, especially those that are bloody and are more deadly than others.

As an example, the newspaper said that in the year 2013, in the Central African Republic, a massacre took place in which hundreds of civilians were killed, but the surprise is that even in the neighboring regions, the population did not know about it, because the media was purged of its news, and the survivors did not dare to speak about it.

And the newspaper added that so far the press is unable to cover many events in the world, and while the media is preoccupied with the Ukrainian war, the deaths in the conflict in the Central African Republic have not been counted, even the war in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, the bloodiest in the world since World War II, It did not appear on news sites.

The newspaper attributed the reasons to a lack of interest in places that are considered remote, and violence against people who are seen as different from others, as it put it.

Another problem, she said, is that news from places like the Central African Republic and Congo often needs to travel to London or New York before it reaches countries like Nigeria and India.

This means that so much international news is filtered through a Western lens or left out altogether, that the lack of international news outlets in the Global South leaves huge gaps in coverage even when millions of people die in the world's deadliest wars.

Monday, March 27, 2023

UNSC failed to get Nord Stream blast international independent investigative commission

    Monday, March 27, 2023   No comments

The UNSC, which literally stands for the United Nations Security Council, and whose mission “is to maintain international peace and security;” failed to adopt a resolution that “would have established an international independent investigative commission into the September 2022 “acts of sabotage” committed on the Nord Stream gas pipeline in the Baltic Sea.”

The vote, or lack thereof as was the case this time, shows how politicized this UN body has become. If the attack on an asset established to transact trade between a number of nation-states is not of concern to the UN body charged with maintaining peace and security, then what is?

The politics of power and control are not limited to the halls of the UN. The media, too, is deep in the business of writing narratives that are highly political and less informative. This screen capture shows how some of these media outlets reported about the vote: “Russia fails at UN to get Nord Stream blast inquiry” when the fact is clear: the UNSC failed to get Nord Stream blast inquiry.

It is because of media bias and the ineptitude of the UNSC that countries are invaded, peoples exploited, and resources and pillaged by the rich and powerful.

Thursday, March 23, 2023

Comparing Scenes from the Protests in the Garden of Prosperity and the Celebration of Nowruz in "Women-Oppressor" Iran

    Thursday, March 23, 2023   No comments

In this week’s media review report, we would like to highlight the disparity in media coverage of social events when they happen in the West versus when the happen in Muslim-majority countries. We propose this media review because the constant and consistent negative coverage of protests in Muslim-majority countries and radio-silence when violent protests and brutal police handling of protesters in the Garden of Prosperity must be challenged as a matter of equity and as a matter of freeing the human rights discourse from political manipulation.

When protests in Iran were instrumentalized to portray yet another government in yet another Muslim-majority country as authoritarian regime ruling over an Islamic society still in need of the paternal protection of the civilized world, the progressives and liberals in the West jumped on the bandwagon. How could they be wrong if someone from somewhere stated in some social media platform that Iran executed 14,000 protesters? Reflexively, even politicians joined in. The Canada’s prime minister amplified the post and condemned Iran for not respecting the rights of peaceful protests.

Here we are weeks deep into the many “peaceful” protests across Europe, and in France, especially, with scenes of heavily armed police violently clashing with unarmed protesters. Yet, not a single Western government called for an end to the violence and the use of force against peaceful protesters.

This is not about using one case of protesters and counter-protesters’ measures to legitimize police brutality against civilians in any country or in all country. It is about the incessant, constant, consistent, and overwhelming media stream portraying violence happening in a Muslim-majority country as a normal event suggesting that Muslims are of violent nature, and the total blackout and abysmal coverage of protests in the West and the violent handling of protests in the West. It is the overwhelming negative coverage of Muslim-majority countries, the absence of any images or stories that depict positive aspects in Muslim-majority countries, and the lack of coverage of the violence that happens in the West that provide a bigoted narrative, and it is this negative narrative that produce a draft of history that is deeply flawed and cruel to people of the Global South.

Here is a glimpse of the deliberate selective coverage: during the same time when Iranian men and women, yes women, were celebrating the new Persian; the streets of Paris and other major French cities were literally on fire. The police were beating, dragging, and arresting protesters. No word of concern for the use of excessive force was uttered by any Western leaders.

When Iranians protested the death of an Iranian woman, all Western leaders reacted; they introduced resolution of condemnation in world organizations, and they imposed sanctions on Iranian individuals and institutions. The world was told that Iran is no place for women to walk the streets without head coverings, and those who do risk arrest and death at the hand of the police. That is a damning narrative not just for Iran, but for Muslims in general.

But when there is evidence of Muslim women in Iran and elsewhere in Muslim-majority countries walking the streets, and celebrating holidays in public spaces wearing or not wearing a range of head coverings, such scenes are suppressed, because they provide a counter narrative to the one that has been portraying Muslims as "woman-oppressing" peoples.

Friday, March 10, 2023

Media Review: The New York Times: The Tehran-Riyadh agreement in Beijing is a great loss for Washington's interests

    Friday, March 10, 2023   No comments

 A report in the American New York Times spoke about the issue of the Iranian-Saudi rapprochement, which came after Chinese mediation, on the basis of which the first meeting between the two parties was held in Beijing today, Friday.

And the American report considered that "the restoration of Iranian-Saudi relations, as a result of Chinese mediation, is a great loss and doubles the interests of the United States."

The New York Times report added, "The announcement by Iran and Saudi Arabia to restore diplomatic relations between them could lead to a major restoration of order in the Middle East."

It also considered that this rapprochement "represents a geopolitical challenge to the United States and a victory for China, which mediated the talks between the two historical rivals."

The newspaper stated, "It was not immediately clear how the breach announced today, Friday, would affect Saudi Arabia's participation in Israeli and American efforts to confront Iran," but it pointed out that "the resumption of diplomatic relations between the two regional powers represents at least a partial melting of the ice of the Cold War." that shaped the Middle East for a long time.

News of the deal, particularly Beijing's role in mediating it, worried foreign policy hawks in Washington, the report confirms, as Mark Dubowitz, CEO of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, said, "The renewal of Iranian-Saudi relations as a result of Chinese mediation is a loss, loss, and loss for American interests."

He said it showed that Saudi Arabia "lacks confidence in Washington" and that Iran could isolate US allies "to ease its isolation." It also indicated that China "has become the main sponsor of power politics in the Middle East."

The report concludes that this rapprochement in relations is supposed to affect Yemen, Iraq, Syria and Lebanon mainly, and these are the files that witnessed a major conflict between Iran and Saudi Arabia regarding the political approach towards them.

Several Arab parties, most notably Egypt, the UAE and Qatar, welcomed the Iranian-Saudi rapprochement, stressing that it would contribute to creating a positive climate in the region and contribute to its stability and security.

Wednesday, March 08, 2023

Is the West losing the propaganda war to China? "Is the [pro-Ukraine group] named Biden Administration?"

    Wednesday, March 08, 2023   No comments

Researchers who monitor the global media will not miss the fact that Chinese media has been more focused these days on analyzing Western media reports than on pumping their own stories. The war in Ukraine and the pressure on China to take side have increased the Chinese media output of stories that depicts Western media and western governments as inconsistent, and biased. This social media post by a Chines official tells the story; the story of how western governments’ action have made it easy for Chinese media and Chinese officials to do their work and appear cool at the same time.

 "Is the [pro-Ukraine group] named Biden Administration?"

The editorials in China’s global media, GT, tell the rest of the story.

The performance of the US and Western media once again illustrates that their so-called independence and professionalism are selective. It's not just the US and Western media, but almost the entire Western world is very passive in seeking the truth behind the Nord Stream bombing. At a recent related UN meeting, the UK showed "tolerance," holding that more investigations are unnecessary and claiming it was unclear why the Russian Federation is suddenly pursuing the issue with such urgency. Many countries including Germany, one of the biggest victims of this incident, has yet to make a public statement. 


Wednesday, January 18, 2023

The "double standard" of the British media... This is how London's lies were promoted before the invasion of Iraq

    Wednesday, January 18, 2023   No comments

The British "Declassified" website talked about the role of the British media in promoting the lies of the British government before the invasion of Iraq.

The site said that the British media repeated the government's lies and fabrications without scrutiny, and became part of the government's propaganda machine, before the invasion of Iraq in 2003.

He pointed out that the former British Prime Minister, Tony Blair, provided the British public with false information twenty years ago about the late Iraqi President Saddam Hussein's possession of weapons of mass destruction, in order to prove the case of the illegal invasion of Iraq.

He added that Blair was not tried yet, but was honored and given the "Rabat" medal, which is the highest honor in the British Kingdom, pointing out that the journalists who repeated his lies were not tried either, but rather climbed the ladder of the profession to its highest levels.

On the other hand, those who dared to expose the lies of the war, such as the Australian journalist Julian Assange, are now in prison.

According to the site, there were serious investigations into false reports about Iraq in the United States, while this was not the case in Britain, where the press and broadcast media became an advanced part of the government propaganda machine.

Likewise, senior British journalists reported uncritical lies about the British government, often adding new fabrications of their own, according to the site.

He added that the Guardian newspaper, for example, "swallowed" the Blair government's bogus claim that Saddam Hussein's agents were looking for uranium in Africa to buy a nuclear bomb.

Under the headline: "Iraq file: African gangs offer a path to uranium - the nuclear suspicion lies with the Congo and South Africa," the newspaper claimed that it had seen secret documents proving contacts between African militias and Baghdad.

The Observer was "more intelligent and creative on the pro-war case," looking for more interesting angles to prove actual or alleged Saddam Hussein's malevolence, such as a 1,560-word interview with a woman claiming to be a former lover of Saddam Hussein, whom she claimed was With Osama bin Laden as a guest in one of Saddam's palaces, and that Saddam was financing Osama.

In turn, the "Sunday Telegraph" newspaper pumped a huge amount of government propaganda, as it published sensational reports that fueled public anxiety on the eve of the war, according to the site.

On January 19, 2003, the newspaper claimed that UN weapons inspectors "discovered evidence that Saddam Hussein is trying to develop an arsenal of nuclear weapons." Indeed, when the weapons inspectors issued their verdict a few days later, they concluded no such thing.

Meanwhile, critics of the war were marginalized or vilified. The site pointed out that Scott Ritter, the United Nations weapons inspector, has repeatedly questioned the allegations of Britain and the United States about Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction, stressing that the importance of his words were downplayed, while the narratives of the attack were reinforced.


Most popular articles


Frequently Used Labels and Topics

77 + China A Week in Review Academic Integrity Adana Agreement afghanistan Africa African Union al-Azhar Algeria Aljazeera All Apartheid apostasy Arab League Arab nationalism Arab Spring Arabs in the West Armenia Arts and Cultures Arts and Entertainment Asia Assassinations Assimilation Azerbaijan Bangladesh Belarus Belt and Road Initiative Brazil BRI BRICS Brotherhood CAF Canada Capitalism Caroline Guenez Caspian Sea cCuba censorship Central Asia Chechnya Children Rights China CIA Civil society Civil War climate colonialism communism con·science Conflict Constitutionalism Contras Corruption Coups Covid19 Crimea Crimes against humanity Dearborn Debt Democracy Despotism Diplomacy discrimination Dissent Dmitry Medvedev Earthquakes Economics Economics and Finance Economy ECOWAS Education and Communication Egypt Elections energy Enlightenment environment equity Erdogan Europe Events Fatima FIFA FIFA World Cup FIFA World Cup Qatar 2020 Flour Massacre Food Football France freedom of speech G20 G7 Garden of Prosperity Gaza GCC GDP Genocide geopolitics Germany Global Security Global South Globalism globalization Greece Grozny Conference Hamas Health Hegemony Hezbollah hijab History and Civilizations Human Rights Huquq ICC Ideas IGOs Immigration Imperialism india Indonesia inequality inflation INSTC Instrumentalized Human Rights Intelligence Inter International Affairs International Law Iran IranDeal Iraq Iraq War ISIL Islam in America Islam in China Islam in Europe Islam in Russia Islam Today Islamic economics Islamic Jihad Islamic law Islamic Societies Islamism Islamophobia ISR MONTHLY ISR Weekly Bulletin ISR Weekly Review Bulletin Japan Jordan Journalism Kenya Khamenei Kilicdaroglu Kurdistan Latin America Law and Society Lebanon Libya Majoritarianism Malaysia Mali mass killings Mauritania Media Media Bias Media Review Middle East migration Military Affairs Morocco Multipolar World Muslim Ban Muslim Women and Leadership Muslims Muslims in Europe Muslims in West Muslims Today NAM Narratives Nationalism NATO Natural Disasters Nelson Mandela NGOs Nicaragua Nicaragua Cuba Niger Nigeria North America North Korea Nuclear Deal Nuclear Technology Nuclear War Nusra October 7 Oman OPEC+ Opinion Polls Organisation of Islamic Cooperation - OIC Oslo Accords Pakistan Palestine Peace Philippines Philosophy poerty Poland police brutality Politics and Government Population Transfer Populism Poverty Prison Systems Propaganda Prophet Muhammad prosperity Protests Proxy Wars Public Health Putin Qatar Quran Racism Raisi Ramadan Regime Change religion and conflict Religion and Culture Religion and Politics religion and society Resistance Rights Rohingya Genocide Russia Salafism Sanctions Saudi Arabia Science and Technology SCO Sectarianism security Senegal Shahed sharia Sharia-compliant financial products Shia Silk Road Singapore Soccer socialism Southwest Asia and North Africa Space War Sports Sports and Politics Sudan sunnism Supremacism SWANA Syria terrorism The Koreas Tourism Trade transportation Tunisia Turkey Turkiye U.S. Foreign Policy UAE uk ukraine UN UNGA United States UNSC Uprisings Urban warfare US Foreign Policy US Veto USA Uyghur Venezuela Volga Bulgaria wahhabism War War and Peace War Crimes Wealth and Power Wealth Building West Western Civilization Western Sahara WMDs Women women rights Work World and Communities Xi Yemen Zionism

Search for old news

Find Articles by year, month hierarchy



Copyright © Islamic Societies Review. All rights reserved.