Narrative Warfare

Combatants lie, so reporters should get to work.

In the war’s opening days, we got our first example of how the grotesque fight over truth will play out. 

Before the smoke had cleared from the al-Ahli Arab Hospital in Gaza, fingers immediately pointed towards Israel. Major news outlets, including the New York Times, Reuters, AP, and PBS, almost in unison, repeated the accusation of Israeli malevolence. 

Their stories came directly from Hamas, presented only with a veneer of journalistic skepticism: “Palestinians say.” 

On cue, anti-Israel fury surged through European and Middle Eastern streets, igniting both protests and attacks on the Israeli government, as well as Jewish sites. The U.N. and politicians quickly joined in condemnation.

The media, whether intentionally or in its relentless pursuit of the next headline, orchestrated a narrative of a villainous Israel. 

Yet within a day, the story flipped. The real culprit appears to be an errant Gazan rocket. The evidence presented by Israel includes multiple-angle footage showing at least one Gaza-fired missile plummeting down, alongside audio of Gaza combatants talking to one another about the accidental hit. It painted a compelling picture. 

The tale of “hundreds trapped under rubble” soon crumbled under scrutiny as well, with photos of the hospital showing no signs of a massive crater or rubble for victims to be trapped underneath. While innocent civilians undoubtedly died, the discrepancy between the initial reports and the evidence was stark. 

The Pentagon now says it has concluded that the missile came from the Islamic Jihad side, yet millions of people will never believe it.

This isn’t mere “fog of war,” and it isn’t new. The tactic of storing arms in schools and hospitals is a grim strategy from the Palestinian side, whose most-used shields are their own innocents, whom they prefer to call “martyrs.” They claim to have no choice, but even in warfare, humans can maintain their humanity.

Instead, this is a twisted PR ploy, where civilian casualties are the currency for sympathy both in Arab lands and the West. As Andrew C. McCarthy pointed out, “For Hamas and its supporters … death is not a tragedy. It is a strategy.”

Yet claims from Hamas are taken at face value despite their history of nonsense. Just days ago, they vehemently denied the atrocities they themselves broadcast on social media. 

The media, in its chase for breaking news, often overlooks the aftermath of its hastily drawn conclusions. Fresh from years of tut-tutting Twitter users for any “misinformation,” their own bad reporting directly led to real-world repercussions. 

The same standards should apply to Israel, of course. Hamas certainly isn't alone among governments that might bend the truth to aid their cause. Both Israel and Hamas know they’re in a fight for their lives, so all of their claims should be viewed in that context. The media’s actual job is to figure out who’s telling the truth, not just to broadcast pictures and echo charges.

Now, the other side

I watched Fox News over the weekend, and all the news anchors I viewed made it abundantly clear that they supported Israel. And not just in relation to the terrorist slaughter. They even let us know that Fox had contributed to Jewish organizations and encouraged viewers to do so as well.

This isn’t just a Red Cross-type organization, but a broader organization that supports many Jewish causes. And I’m sure it’s a great group, worthy of contributions. As are groups that provide assistance to Gazan civilians.

Ten years ago at Fox News, you would’ve seen anchors doing their best to keep their opinions out of the news reporting; that’s the exclusive job of the opinion hosts who get paid a whole lot of money.

Because while “We support Israel” is a popular notion and undoubtedly a ratings booster, it’s a long-term step away from the essence of journalism. The smarter, long-term Fox positioning should be “You can trust us because we don’t take sides.” Or, to reach back in time, they could pitch being “Fair and Balanced.” Maybe even “We report, you decide.” 

When the next controversy in this war comes along – it’ll be soon – who will we turn to if every media referee has, once again, chosen their team?

   – Ken