News outlets backtrack on the Gaza blast because they relied on Hamas
The Israeli Military Blast During 9/11: Updated Coverage of the Theta-Like Explosion and Implications for Newsroom Governance
The Times stated that the Israeli military was investigating the blast, and that Palestinian officials were responsible for the claim. However, the early versions of the coverage — and the prominence it received in a headline, news alert and social media channels — relied too heavily on claims by Hamas, and did not make clear that those claims could not immediately be verified. Readers were left with a false impression about the account in the report.
The Israeli government denied that it was at fault and blamed a rocket launch by the Islamic Jihad group. American officials said that the evidence showed that the rocket came from Palestinian positions.
The Times continued to update its coverage as more information became available, reporting the disputed claims of responsibility and noting that the death toll might be lower than initially reported. Within two hours, the headline and other text at the top of the website reflected the scope of the explosion and the dispute over responsibility.
Given the sensitive nature of the news during a widening conflict, and the prominent promotion it received, Times editors should have taken more care with the initial presentation, and been more explicit about what information could be verified. To determine what additional safeguards should be considered, newsroom leaders examine procedures pertaining to the biggest breaking news events and use of the largest headlines in the digital report.
The audiences’ perceptions of media outlets’ fairness determine how much trust they have – not just in the veracity of specific coverage but the independence of their journalists. Speed may matter a lot to readers, viewers and listeners. When stakes are so high, accuracy and fairness are more important.
The Holocaust in Gaza: Palestinians and Israelis, Public Figures, the Media, and the Press. Israel Gaza Hospital Strike Media (Nyt A Gaza)
The day after the blast, the group Physicians for Human Rights called for an independent investigation and urged the protection of civilian life. It did not project blame.
A group of prominent news outlets and public figures organizations used Hamas’ claims as an excuse to disregard the validity of their information, according to a report by The Washington FreeBeacon’s Drew Holden.
The Israeli military conducted its own investigation and subsequently confirmed that an Israeli soldier had likely fired the lethal shot but did not disclose the shooter’s name. A government spokesperson’s expression of sorrow for her death, a year later, was deemed insufficient by Abu Akleh’s family. The FBI opened an investigation last year.
The selection of journalists by the Times has come under scrutiny in recent days. An Israeli diplomat was upset that the paper had employed a videographer in Gaza to document the conflict. In the past 11 years, Hijjy has praised the leader of the Nazi party in numerous social media postings. A spokesperson for the Times says the paper reviewed those “problematic” postings last year, when the issue was first raised, and took actions “to ensure he understood our concerns and could adhere to our standards.”
It’s almost impossible for outside reporters to get into Gaza even if they were from Israel. Most news outlets are either covering it remotely or by local journalists who are at risk from Israeli strikes.
Hamas is the most trusted source of information about the events in Gaza. Last week, for example, a Hamas spokesman denied in an interview with NPR’s Steve Inskeep that militants from the group had slaughtered hundreds of civilians at a music concert in the Israeli desert, despite accounts by survivors, Israeli officials and journalists for major news outlets. (Inskeep pointedly noted that the attackers did kill civilians.)
Hamas is more than that. The US and the European Union have labeled it a terrorist organization. More than 1,400 people are dead and more than 200 people are hostages in the most lethal attack in Israel’s history.
The BBC is a good place, not a bad place: An apology from the UK’s BBC for commenting on the BBC’s editorial “In defence of the Standard Model”
The BBC later issued a statement citing the full breadth of its coverage but saying that the degree of speculation in his report was, in retrospect, wrong.
The stakes can’t be higher. The sources can be unreliable. Concrete facts are often scant. And yet readers reward publications that push out information instantaneously.
