ā€¦ over the course of Israelā€™s genocide, Western media have actively avoided investigatingā€”and even downplayedā€”the true human costs of the war by eagerly parroting Israeli officials who cast doubt on the claims of the Gaza Health Ministry. Despite those supposed doubts, Western media default to citing the health ministry tally in day-to-day coverage of the war, while making little mention of the long-held consensus among health experts that far more Palestinians were dying than were being recorded (New York Times, 12/27/24; CNN, 8/16/24).

The downplaying can be seen in Western mediaā€™s repeated refrain that the health ministry is ā€œHamas-runā€ or ā€œHamas-controlledā€ (BBC, 12/3/23; New York Times, 10/19/23; CNN, 12/4/23) and therefore not to be trusted. More than adding doubt, labeling civilian infrastructure as ā€œHamas-controlledā€ puts Palestinians in harmā€™s way. Israelā€™s desire to paint anything Palestinian as Hamas is ā€œan implicit association of Palestinians with evil, essentially making Palestinian lives dispensable,ā€ writes Noora Said in Mondoweiss (12/29/23).

It stretches the mind to imagine a more pressing task for journalism than accurately reporting on an unfolding genocide. For US audiences, whose tax dollars are bankrolling the slaughter, news outlets should be making every effort to help them appreciate the full consequences of their governmentā€™s foreign policy.

Thatā€™s undoubtedly a difficult job. The sheer scale of destruction in Gaza, and its status as an open-air death camp walled off from the rest of the world, means outsiders donā€™t have the ability to get a complete picture of the devastation. That would require an exhaustive cross-referencing of Gaza Health Ministry documents and (Israeli-controlled) population registers, as well as a broad collection of witness testimonies that international observers just donā€™t have unfettered access to. But major Western media outlets need to ask themselves a question similar to what the International Court of Justice asked in January 2024: ā€œWhatā€™s plausible?ā€

In addition to the most recent direct death estimate, a letter in the Lancet (7/20/24) by public health researchers took a stab at answering the broader question of all attributable deaths last July. Taking into account historical wartime data, the researchers suggested that for each death directly caused by Israeli weaponry, there could be four or more indirect deaths. ā€œIt is not implausible to estimate that up to 186,000 or even more deaths could be attributable to the current conflict in Gaza,ā€ they wrote.

In October, 99 American medical practitioners who served in Gaza wrote a letter to then-President Joe Biden, estimating that at least 118,908 Palestinian had already been killed, directly or indirectly, by Israel. The physicians used a variety of methods, including a calculation of the minimum number of deaths likely to result from the number of civilians classified as facing catastrophic and emergency-level starvation.

Ideally, the vast resources of an outlet like the Times could be used to begin to corroborate these estimates from public health and medical researchers. At the very least, the fact that researchers estimate the true scale of death in Gaza to be three or more times the official tally should bear constant repetition in paragraphs that add context to daily news stories on the topic.

Sana Saeed, a leading critic of Western mediaā€™s coverage of Israelā€™s genocide, noted: ā€œIf your article can include a line about how the IDF denies yet another war crime that itā€™s very clearly committed, then your article can include how leading health studies are estimating that the number of slaughtered Palestinians exceeds 100,000.ā€ā€¦

  • yesman@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    Ā·
    2 months ago

    I donā€™t like Noam Chomsky very much, but I canā€™t read this without thinking of the term ā€œunworthy victimsā€ and the Five Filters.