British media is failing its audience, especially Post-October 7 - opinion

A recent edition of The London Review of Books included a lengthy essay by Pankaj Mishra, which suggested that the October 7th massacre was justified due to Israel’s oppression of Palestinians. Mishra also legitimized the antisemitic charge that Israel has become a Nazi-like state.

1. October 7th inversion: Projecting the evil committed by Hamas onto the Israeli victims

The Guardian published dozens of op-eds and articles accusing Israel of genocide or ethnic cleansing in the first two months of the war, while failing to charge Hamas for its mass slaughter of Israelis or any other human rights violations.

The charge against Israel is false, as experts on urban warfare have noted that the civilian-to-combatant ratio in Gaza is likely the best of any war and that the IDF has gone out of its way to prevent civilian casualties.

In addition to the ‘genocide’ libel, a Guardian op-ed published on October 11th referred to Gaza as a “concentration camp” -  antisemitic language that is typically avoided at most outlets. The Guardian defended its use of the term in response to our complaint, citing that Haaretz commentator Gideon Levy used it.

2. Erasing Hamas’ antisemitism

We have long argued that one of the biggest blind spots in UK media coverage is Hamas’ annihilationist antisemitism.  It’s codified in their founding charter, and it perpetuates their continuous war against Israel. Yet, media outlets frame their racism as a legitimate grievance, citing the non-existent occupation. It is impossible to understand what happened on October 7th without considering Hamas’ antisemitism, and therefore, most news consumers have a hard time understanding the true cause of this war.

3. Making Hamas disappear 

If you scour the British media coverage of the war like we do, you notice that photos of Hamas terrorists or their weapons are almost never shown, even though the IDF often shares photos of confiscated weapons hidden in homes, mosques, and hospitals.

All that is typically shown is suffering Palestinian civilians amidst the rubble of damaged buildings - a myopic depiction of the war that distorts the conflict and feeds into the broader narrative that only what Israel allegedly does or doesn’t do is newsworthy.

4. Denial of Palestinian/Hamas agency

The Western media denies Palestinian agency, but constantly scrutinizes Israel’s decisions, actions, and motivations and demands that it end the war. Those same demands are never made towards Hamas, who can surrender and release the hostages and end the war tomorrow.  

It is also rarely reported that, according to polling, most Palestinians still support Hamas. Contrast that omission with the numerous reports telling readers that Israel is always moving to the right politically. If Israeli political views are relevant to the reporting on the conflict, why aren’t Palestinian views relevant?

5. Erasing the continuing war against Israel

British news consumers could be forgiven for believing that the war against Israel ended on October 8th because most outlets stopped reporting on Gaza rocket attacks on Israeli cities a few days into the war, even though the attacks continued for months.

British news consumers also likely don’t know that hundreds of thousands of Israelis have been displaced from the south and north. Northerners were evacuated because Hezbollah joined the attack on Israel on October 8th by firing thousands of deadly projectiles at Israeli towns, killing seven civilians and ten soldiers.  

6. Trusting Hamas claims and statistics

It’s hard to find another war in which Western media outlets trust statistics provided by a terrorist group. Yet, most British media cite Hamas’ health ministry claims that since October 7th, 32,000 people, allegedly mostly women and children, have been killed. They cite Hamas’ figures despite the fact that: 1) Analyses by reputable statisticians have demonstrated that Hamas’ figures are impossible;  2) Hamas doesn’t distinguish between terrorists and civilians; 3) Hamas includes those Palestinians killed by its own misfired rockets; 4) Outlets rarely cite Israeli statistics showing that roughly 14,000 of the casualties were terrorists.

Remember that most outlets trusted Hamas’ accusation that Israel attacked al-Ahli hospital in Gaza, which they claimed killed 500 people, until it was proven to have been a misfired Palestinian Islamic Jihad rocket. Again, one must ask why Hamas’ unproven claims were taken at face value by journalists whose job it is to scrutinize such accusations.

As troubling as the biased and inaccurate reporting is, there are some bright spots. Through our vigilance and constant communication with the media, we at the Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting (CAMERA) prompt corrections to factual errors and see improved coverage of issues that we focus on. It’s our hope that by identifying the patterns of bias, and providing the tools necessary to fight back, our supporters can better understand the reporting on the war to help us keep the media accountable.

Adam Levick serves as the co-editor of CAMERA UK, the UK division of the US-based group CAMERA (Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting).

This op-ed is published in partnership with a coalition of organizations that fight antisemitism across the world. Read the previous article by Masha Merkulova.