Truth Is Hard to Get in Gaza
Hamas has held tight control over coverage, and the peace plan is unlikely to change that.
By Robert Satloff
With a Gaza cease-fire, calls are growing to open the war-battered area to international media, and a flood of reporters can be expected soon.
But the arrival of more journalists doesn’t necessarily mean the public will be better informed.
Since Oct. 7, 2023, Israel has restricted international media access to Gaza, arguing that it didn’t have the resources to protect them and that the war zone was too dangerous to allow reporters to roam on their own.
Israel has escorted a trickle of foreign journalists on tightly controlled visits, and a handful of media outlets either had their own local Palestinian stringers or engaged Gaza-based reporters.
But for the most part, the Hamas-Israel war went two years without on-the-ground coverage by traditional war correspondents.
The inability of independent journalists to travel freely is often cited as a key reason the war over facts in Gaza has been nearly as vicious as the fighting itself.
Disputes over such issues as the number of Palestinian civilian casualties, the source of errant bombs and the amount of food entering the area have raged from the beginning of this conflict, fueling arguments over claims of war crimes and genocide.
Without the unfettered reporting of respected journalists, the argument goes, the truth is another victim.
From the beginning of the war, media outlets and advocacy groups have lobbied for more access.
At one point, even President Trump joined the fray.
Asked during an August press conference whether he would like to see Israel allow foreign media into Gaza, he said, “I’d like to see that happen.”
Yet opening Gaza to international media won’t necessarily improve our understanding of what is happening there.
Check the record of local Palestinian reporters who have reported from Gaza for international media over the past two years.
Take Anas Baba, a local Palestinian reporter for National Public Radio, one of the few journalists who stayed in Gaza for a major U.S. media platform throughout the war.
To someone who listens to his often-gripping stories it’s clear that Mr. Baba has both courage and ingenuity.
But there is something else that a review of his reportage reveals: He never focuses on Hamas.
Of the nearly 70 radio segments to which he contributed since January, Mr. Baba didn’t report a single comprehensive story on Hamas.
That is, not one thorough report on Hamas’s leadership, decision-making, governance, military operations or popular support.
Not one.
Mr. Baba isn’t unique.
The Associated Press also has local Palestinian stringers, and my review of its hundreds of stories on the war this year revealed a total of two deeply reported pieces on Hamas—neither datelined from Gaza.
These were a Jan. 21 report on Hamas’s staying-power at the start of the Trump administration, and a March 26 report on emerging Palestinian protest against Hamas rule.
Other than these stories, I found that AP reporters in Gaza did no in-depth reporting on Hamas’s recruitment of new combatants, domination of the civilian population, control of Israeli hostages, or intimidation of food-delivery efforts.
Why?
Because although Israel may be the dominant military power, even a beleaguered and diminished Hamas has been able to control the media environment.
It is well known that bias is a serious problem in Gaza war reporting.
This ranges from disturbing accusations that some local Palestinian journalists who work for Arab media such as Al Jazeera were secretly Hamas operatives, Hamas sympathizers or on the Hamas payroll to charges of bias against reporters, editors and photographers at some of America’s leading news organizations.
But bias isn’t the only problem. Merely reporting from Hamas-controlled Gaza requires facing Hamas threats, intimidation and extortion.
For some journalists, the solution to survive the Gaza crucible has apparently been to limit their reporting to the slice of the overall story Hamas didn’t mind being told—the hardships of Israeli attacks on the local population—without discussion of Hamas’s role.
This is unlikely to improve with the arrival of scores of international journalists.
Many will seek out a local fixer to translate, arrange interviews, navigate the war zone and secure food and lodging.
The bigger outlets will hire huge teams of local crew, including drivers and technicians, in addition to the support staff needed to care for star correspondents who will want to make a Gaza appearance.
Even with the best intentions and oversight from headquarters, this will be a bonanza for Hamas’s well-oiled media operation, which has controlled virtually every word written or broadcast in Gaza since 2007.
One can be sure Hamas is preparing for what will be both a huge jobs program and a chance to mold the message of powerful media operations.
This isn’t a call to maintain the ban on foreign journalists, who deserve a chance to do their job.
But it is a warning to consumers of news: When all those reporters start filing copy from Rafah or doing stand-ups from Khan Yunis, pay attention to whether we are getting a slanted piece of the Gaza story or the whole picture.
Mr. Satloff is executive director of the Washington Institute.
0 comments:
Publicar un comentario