By Lauren Comeau
In this digital age, news stories covering politics and social issues are becoming more and more polarized.
In a 2020 Pew Research study, it found that 79% of Americans believe that news coverage in the country leans one-sided, while only 20% believe that these organizations deal fairly with all sides. It seems to be a growing issue in western media, especially now, as many news organizations are facing criticism for their coverage of the ongoing Israel-Palestine conflict.
On October 7, 2023, Hamas launched its deadly attack on Israel, prompting Israel Defense Forces to respond with several aerial campaigns and on ground operations in the Gaza Strip. Since then, over 2 million Gazans have been forced to flee their homes due to the conflict. Recent data places casualties at around 36,000 Palestinians and 1,139 Israeli citizens, including over two dozen children.
![](https://www.aljazeera.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/1080x1080-1717766721.png?w=770&quality=80)
There has been an outpouring of international support to push for a ceasefire resolution and develop a long-term concept for peace between the two states. Many countries, such as Norway and Ireland, have publicly recognized Palestine as an independent state and students across the globe have taken part in encampment protests to push for their universities’ divestment from Israel-linked organizations. However, major media outlets such as the New York Times, CNN, and the Washington Post have shown consistent bias against Palestinians, failing to show the impact that this violence has had on those within the conflict zone.
So in what ways does this news bias appear?
News bias can take many different forms, from word choice and tone, to labeling of certain groups, and even the selection of visuals for a story. While bias does have some influence over the presentation of facts, it is not always detectable.
In the case of major U.S. newspapers and their coverage on the conflict in Gaza, the bias present often exists in the imbalances of voices covered and the favoring of Israeli narratives over others.
In an analysis done by the Intercept, an American nonprofit news organization, they collected over 1,000 articles published during the first six weeks of the conflict from the New York Times, the Washington Post, and the Los Angeles Times. They tallied the number of usages of certain key terms and the contexts they were used in.
The results from this analysis found that there was a disproportionate coverage of deaths on each side, as well as the lack of mention of the high death rates among Gazan children and journalists during the conflict. In stories all covered by the New York Times, Washington Post, and Los Angeles Times, the words “Israeli” or “Israel” appeared more times than “Palestinian” or any other variation of that, even with Palestinian deaths rapidly outpacing that of Israelis. For every two Palestinians killed, they are only mentioned once. Also, there was noticeably higher usage of emotive terms such as “slaughter” and “massacre” when reporting on the killing of Israeli civilians, compared to that of civilian casualties.
![](https://theintercept.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/gaza-media-chart-2-rev-1.png?w=2400)
An example of this type of behavior from reporters can be seen in the coverage stories of the October 7 attack. In a piece by the New York Times dated November 2023, the headline read “They Ran Into Bomb Shelters for Safety. Instead They Were Slaughtered”. The word choice for the headline (ex: “slaughtered”) and the tone of voice were blatantly meant to evoke sympathetic emotions from audiences, which is understandable given the situation. However, comparing that to the Times’s profile on Palestinian deaths, which was titled “ The War Turns Gaza Into a ‘Graveyard’ for Children,” there seems to be a higher level of disconnect. In this case, “graveyard” is replacing any level of accountability for the mass killings by Israeli forces. With examples such as these, there is such identifiable bias towards the Israeli state and can be harmful in shaping people’s opinion on the conflict.
So what can be done to fix this issue?
There is a growing push for more balanced media coverage on the issue, mainly by those in support of Palestinian liberation. With many western world leaders, including the United States, refusing to recognize the horrific acts committed by Israel against Palestinians, the press can be a powerful tool in rallying public support. It is important that the news media and journalists prioritize fairness in their reporting. Although not without its difficulties, they must do what they can to reach both sides of the issue.
If the news media were to uphold a level of accountability, then it could help give a voice to the millions in Palestine begging to be heard.