The media should play a neutral role, but instead behaves more like a military choir for the State of Israel, spreading and shaping anti-Palestinian racism and pro-Israeli propaganda.
Here are 34 obvious examples:
ON WEAPONS & CIVILIAN CASUALTIES…
1. How much media spotlight has been shone on the disproportional range of weapons used by Israel, i.e., fighter jets, cobra helicopters, battleships, armoured personnel tanks and carriers, guided missile carriers, anti-tank missiles, artillery bombs, RPGs, stun grenades, armed drones, drones dispersing rash gas and tear gas mixed with pepper spray, rubber coated steel bullets, automatic weapons, rifles with silencers, high velocity live ammunition, chemical weapons, & iron dome air defence system, etc., VERSUS weapons used by Palestinians i.e., rockets, guns, Molotov cocktails, rocks, firecrackers, knives & cars?
2. How much airtime and column inches have been dedicated to Israeli cluster bombs that contain multiple explosive submunitions, or smart precision-guided weapons containing up to 1000 kg or more of explosives inflicted on the civilian population of Gaza, causing far more deaths VERSUS Palestinian rockets attacks (albeit terrifying) against the civilian population in Israel?
3. Between 2006-2021 across 5 attacks by Israel on Gaza, 3165 Palestinian civilians and 31 Israeli civilians (click here for sources) were killed, according to local and global human rights groups and NGOs. That is a ratio of 1:102. Why is this verifiable fact missing from media reports?
4. Why is media coverage not based on size and magnitude of damage on civilian and public infrastructure?
5. If the regular Israeli attacks on Gaza and the near daily killing of Palestinians in the Occupied Palestinian Territories is not considered a genocide, what is?
ON INTERNATIONAL LAW…
6. The International Humanitarian Law (IHL) states “wars of national liberation is a protected and essential right of occupied people everywhere“. It also affirms the right of the occupied people to “seek and receive support in their struggles“. Click here to refer to Additional Protocol (dated 6 June 1977) to the Geneva Conventions, 12/08/1949. Don’t the Palestinians, as an occupied indigenous persons, have the right to resist their occupier in every way possible including armed struggle?
7. If any attack must be proportionate, and if direct and indiscriminate attacks against civilians were prohibited by international humanitarian law and all necessary precautions must be taken to avoid civilian casualties, and damage to public utilities and infrastructure (e.g., water, sewage, electricity, etc.,), what can be done at the international level to ensure these norms are enforced, sanctions are applied and violations swiftly taken to court, or at the very least, media spotlight put on these war crimes?
Click here for a list of public infrastructure damage (read “indictable war crimes”) Israel has caused in Gaza between 2006-2021 (notes 1-5)
8. Why is media coverage not based on the frequency and historical record of blatant violations of international norms and laws?
ON CYCLE OF VIOLENCE…
9. Do rockets in Israel represent “a dangerous escalation” in a “cycle of violence“ between Israel and the Palestinians or the:
- police hitting people at the Al-Aqsa mosque with the butts of rifles and batons;
- attack of unarmed civilian protestors and funeral-goers;
- nightly raids in West Bank & East Jerusalem (Occupied Territories);
- near daily killings of Palestinians in their own homes, at checkpoints and elsewhere;
- endless daily harassment of Palestinians at up to 700+ checkpoints; and
- the 55-year old illegal occupation by Israel;
- the 16-year old debilitating siege, embargo and blockade of Gaza?
ON MEDIA NARRATIVE…
10. When a Palestinian kills an Israeli soldier(s) or an illegal settler(s), why is it called a “terrorist attack” but when an Israeli settler(s) stabs or kills, commits arson against Palestinian properties, farms or cars in the presence and protection of the Israeli army, it is reported as “settler violence“?
11. When a citizen of Israel is killed, it is reported as “Israeli killed“. When Palestinians are killed, it is reported as Palestinian “deaths” to minimise the shock. Why?
12. When an Israeli is killed, why is called “person wounded in a terror attack” but when a Palestinian is killed, it is called “died in clashes”. Why?
13. When a Palestinian gunman kills half a dozen Israelis (including civilians), it is reported as “absolutely horrific” but when the same number of Palestinians or far more are killed by Israel, why is this reported as “recent events” or “Palestinians killed in a raid”?
14. When Palestinians are killed by settlers or Israeli Occupation Force on land considered by international law to be under illegal occupation i.e., East Jerusalem & West Bank, why is this always reported as “clashes” during an Israeli “raid“?
15. Why is the media so afraid of using more accurate words such as “murder“, “massacre“, “killing“, or “attack” when Palestinians are killed?
16. Why is violence against armed/unarmed illegal settler(s) or IOF soldier(s) “extremism and militancy” but living in homes violently snatched from the Palestinians not extremism and militancy?
17. Why is the Israel-Palestinian issue often framed by the media as “complex” when the 75-year old injustices are anything but, as per volumes of reports published by 223+ human rights groups, legal defence organisations, independent NGOs, activists and charities? Either they are all collectively lying or Israel is. Click here for our take.
18. Why is the Palestinian dispossession often framed as a “conflict”, as if the warring parties were equal in political, economic and military strength – when Israel has so much more firepower power than the Palestinians?
This is not a conflict or war between 2 equal groups of people. It is occupier Vs. the occupied. A military power Vs. a poorly armed resistance.
19. Why does the media not question PayPal, Western Union and others for its very limited and exorbitant services in Gaza Strip or West Bank, while it has no qualms operating and servicing illegal settlers in Occupied Palestinian Territories, which are illegal as per international law?
20. Why has the fear of being falsely accused of anti-Semitism got the mainstream media in such a chokehold?
ON AL AQSA & JERUSALEM…
21. We question why worshippers are armed with sticks and stones inside a place of worship but do not question the illegal presence of a fully armed occupying force outside that place of worship?
22. Why do Palestinians or anyone else around the world in a place of worship, need to be beaten or arrested?
23. Violence does not “erupt” when Palestinians resist with stones and sticks. The eruption occurs when Israeli forces attack Palestinians going about their day.
24. Would there be any “clashes”, “eruption” or “contest” for control of Al-Aqsa if the Israeli paramilitary police force refrained from storming Al-Aqsa while Palestinians were worshipping there?
25. How can Palestinians be accused of “disrupting public order and desecrating the mosque” simply by worshipping there but the storming of Al-Aqsa by Israeli security forces is not seen to “disrupt public order and desecrate the mosque”?
26. Why does mainstream media insist on presenting Israel (the illegal occupier) as a judicious party responsible for “law and order” or “upholding the law” while Palestinians (the occupied) are presented as violent, disruptive and riotous?
27. The “clashes” at Al-Aqsa, East Jerusalem and across West Bank is never a violent encounter between the “agitator Palestinians” and “Israeli law and order” but between an occupying army against the occupied.
28. Why is Al-Aqsa referred to as a “contested” holy site, an oft-repeated propaganda talking point from Israel – justifying the need for Israeli police (occupying force) to be present to ensure calm between two parties.
The United Nations and the international community recognizes East Jerusalem, including the Old City and Al-Aqsa Mosque, as Occupied Palestinian Territory, and considers Israeli settlements in the area to be illegal under international law. That is not only the long-established status quo but also the international legal status of the area. Therefore this is not a matter of legal opinion. There is no legal basis for Israeli claim to sovereignty over the Al Aqsa Mosque, let alone refer to it as “contested”.
ON QUESTIONING WESTERN POWERS…
29. Why are Western governments never questioned for using red herring terms such as being perpetually “alarmed”, having “deep concerns over recent escalation of violence”, “caution against “inflammatory rhetoric” and urging the “need to restore calm”, instead of simply condemning Israel for its grotesque human rights record (as per global human rights groups) against Palestinian civilians?
30. Instead of demanding an end to Israeli siege of Gaza and Israeli apartheid in West Bank & Jerusalem, why do Western government criticise activists and human rights groups denouncing it?
31. Why do Western governments faithfully insist Israel (the occupier) has the “right to defend itself” and our support remains “iron-clad” given “our enduring friendship” and “shared values” but curiously, never insist on the same for Palestinians (the occupied)?
32. When Israelis are killed, the standard Western narrative is “we condemn attack on innocent civilians”. When Palestinians are killed, the default statement widely reported (but never questioned) is the ineffectual and empty “calls for both sides to de-escalate tensions”. Why?
33. Why do we implicate certain countries for unlawful killings, labelling them massacres and genocide and walk on eggs shells with others?
34. Would it have been acceptable to do business with Apartheid South Africa, Nazi Germany or even present-day North Korea? Then why do we turn a blind eye to occupier/apartheid Israel?
These are not editorial errors. Its an editorial choice by many in the mainstream media today.