The Israel-Palestine conflict is a long-standing and highly complex political dispute in the Middle East. Its history traces back to the late 19th century, when Jewish immigrants started moving to Palestine, displacing the Palestinians who had already been living there. After years of growing tensions, the United Nations divided the area in two to appease both groups. But achieving a lasting peace settlement is a complex and challenging process. For decades, during the sudden outbreaks of violence between Israel and Palestine, Western media has been accused of having a pro-Israel bias. The main purpose of Western journalism is to function as a watchdog and hold people in power accountable, but recently, it seems to have failed at keeping an unbiased outlook while reporting on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. What might this bias implicate, especially in the wake of the Hamas attack across the border?

Despite recent improvements and increased attention to obscure voices, bias still exists in the media. Readers should know how to analyze what they are consuming to gain the most accurate knowledge. We should be asking questions like: What country is the media based in? What connections do the journalists have, and where are they getting their “facts” from? What are the political relationships between the country reporting and the countries being reported about? 

For instance, take Channel 4 News journalist Cathy Newman’s interview of Husam Zomlot, Palestinian Ambassador to the UK, immediately after speaking to an Israeli politician. The very first question Newman asked was if Zomlot would condemn Hamas’ actions. Zomlot refused to answer, instead arguing against the “business of always being obsessed with blaming the victim, the occupied, the colonized, the besieged, when in fact I didn’t see you asking her [the politician] to condemn … the killing of an entire family [in Gaza] that your reporter just mentioned.” Newman’s question to Zomlot is one that is commonly presented to Palestinians in Western media. During the span of this conflict, hundreds of Palestinians have been killed by Israeli airstrikes. Still, Western media outlets have focused on the Hamas rockets and asked Palestinians to condemn alleged crimes committed by other Palestinians. Many Western sources only turn their heads when a Hamas strike occurs, claiming that an “unprovoked attack” has emerged from nowhere. Hamas is established as the sole antagonist with the surrounding political context being removed, when in reality, there often is a myriad of factors that have contributed to the attack beforehand.

The language used surrounding this conflict also contributes to Western propaganda. The skewed dynamic portrayed by Western media is that when Israel is bombing Gaza, it has a “right to defend itself,” but any act of violence by a Palestinian is “terrorism.” Why might this bias exist? Analysts argue that it may be related to the imbalance of power relations between Palestinians and Israelis. Israel is a recognized state with strong ties with the West and is considered a Western democracy, while Palestinians have no state and operate under the confines of Israeli occupation, so Israel can better control and shape the narrative. As of October 27th, Palestinians in Gaza have experienced a lack of fuel, water, power, and even food. Hundreds of people have been stuck underneath the rubble, with other families trying to escape before more airstrikes ruin their homes and livelihoods. Meanwhile, news outlets dehumanize Palestinians, obscuring their suffering. This, in itself, is no different from the terrorism they are trying to denounce. Because Western media paints the conflict a certain way, polarization and hate have spread worldwide. In the United States alone, there have been at least two reported anti-Palestinian hate crimes that have led to murder, one of them being a six-year-old boy. These crimes were a direct result of propaganda repeated by politicians and news media. There has also been a rise in Islamaphobia and antisemitism. Jewish people have been experiencing hatred and forms of violence fueled by such skewed journalism that causes us to jump to conclusions.

Thus, it has become increasingly essential for media consumers to be critical and seek out a variety of sources to get a comprehensive view of the situation. Biased reporting can reinforce pre-existing beliefs, even false ones – which can be detrimental to grasping the situation at hand. Media coverage can shape public opinion, which in turn impacts government policies, diplomatic efforts, and ultimately, how the situation is treated. The nature of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has significantly led to polarization, with individuals taking sides and viewing the situation in black-and-white terms. While media organizations have their own responsibility to provide balanced and accurate reporting, it is imperative that we media consumers also be mindful of what we read to gain a well-rounded understanding. 

This article was edited by Grace Hur.