Two faces of Gaza

I remember that in Maria Ressa’s book, “How to Stand Up to a Dictator,” she discussed the consequences of misinformation by mass media. In this ongoing conflict between Israel and Hamas, I was following the reportage basically from two major international news channels. After a few days, I realized there was no discrepancy as both channels were reporting the same statistics and data. For example, the number of casualties reported was basically the same.

However, my view on the conflict was not the same if I based my conclusions solely on the reportage on it. One of the most widely reported incident was the number of children that died as a result of the violence. The difference was that one channel emphasized the number of Israeli children and even babies killed by the Hamas invaders. On the other hand, the number of Palestinian children killed in the bombing of Gaza by the Israeli army and air force was the one repeatedly reported by the other channel.

The suffering of children resulting from the Israeli-Hamas conflict has been a dominant theme by both channels. It is the way the suffering of children was reported that made the difference. In one channel, where the focus was on the casualties of Israeli children, the reportage was mainly based on interviews and even a few photographs. In the other channel, there were actual videos of Palestinian children shown either suffering in hospitals or were seen being brought to the hospital. The close-up videos of suffering children were more dramatic. In the case of the Israeli citizens that were kidnapped, the hardships they endured were discussed mainly in interviews and in photographs.

On the other hand, in the other channel, the victims of the Israeli bombing were actually shown live on video. One of the most tragic events that happened was when Hamas raiders attacked a music festival being attended by young Israeli citizens. In one channel, there was a scene showing the attendees running for their lives. There were also interviews of relatives of some of the victims. In a lengthy interview with an Israeli military spokesman, he talked of babies being killed and women being raped.

In the other channel, the same musical event was also discussed; the difference was that there was no video showing people running nor any mention of babies being killed and women being raped.

However, the statistics of the number of attendees being killed and held hostage were the same in both reports.

Another major difference was the discussion on the ongoing bombing by the Israeli Air Force. In one channel, Israeli spokesmen said that their bombing targets were specific Hamas targets, although collateral damage was admitted. Their justification was that collateral damage was an inevitable consequence in a war situation. On the other hand, the reporting on the other channel describe the bombing as carpet bombing, which implied no specific target but was directed at the whole of Gaza.

Another difference I noted was that in one channel, the message was that the United States and the whole world was in solidarity with the struggle that Israel was undergoing and that there was almost unanimous condemnation of the Hamas invasion. In the other channel, the emphasis was more on the warning by United Nations and spokesmen from other countries that in the retaliatory bombing by the Israeli Air Force and the anticipated ground invasion, the Israelis should be aware that international laws protected the rights of non-combatant civilians.

Spokesmen of the Israeli military used terms such as Hamas should be decimated. In fact, in a population of 2.1 million, 150,000 or so citizens of Gaza were told to evacuate from the northern part. In the other channel, the warning to evacuate was also reported. However, there was a lot of interviews with local residents who were claiming that there was nowhere else to go to seek shelter. Perhaps, it should be remembered that Gaza is one of the most densely populated cities in the world because it is only a narrow strip of land.

I could go on and show other distinctions but my point remains the same. The two coverages were both accurate in terms of statistics and facts. The difference was in the emphasis of the facts and the interpretation of the events based on which facts were being highlighted. The choice of videos has also shown the power and impact of the age of visuals.

Perhaps it is important for my readers to understand what is Hamas. The official name of this Sunni organization is Islamic Resistance Movement. It is the current group governing the Gaza Strip of the Palestinian territories. It was founded by a Palestinian activist, Ahmed Yassin, in 1973 and started as a religious charity. It did not become involved in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict until the late 1990s.

Hamas won the majority of the Palestinian Council in the 2006 Palestinian legislative elections.  Historically, it has sought an Islamic Palestinian state over the combined territory of Israel, the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. It has been involved in wars with Israel since 2007.

In May 2017, it declared that it is anti-Zionist, rather than anti-Jewish. In recent years, the organization’s leader, Khaled Mashaal, has publicly affirmed the movement’s readiness to accept a two-state solution. While Europe and the United States have openly backed a two-state solution, the government of Netanyahu has opposed this solution.

In watching the events unfold in Israel and Gaza, I have realized the importance of listening to different sources of information and points of view.

*      *      *

Email: [email protected]