Selective silence: How Israeli media shapes public perception of Gaza War

Writing in the liberal Israeli daily Haaretz on April 6, Gideon Levy argued that press freedom in Israel "is an extremely selective matter." Focusing on broadcasters and newspapers, he said, they tailor their output to "entertain the viewers, not annoy them, God forbid, lest they switch channels or cancel their subscriptions." Levy points out that a journalist who "says he is ashamed to be an Israeli in light of what is happening in Gaza will hurt [viewers and readers] feelings" by reporting honestly. Therefore, managers and journalists unite "not to hurt the public's feelings." Gaza is avoided except, Levy said, to report that so many "militants" or "Hamas operatives" were killed in an Israeli airstrike that slew dozens of innocent men, women and children.

Also writing in Haaretz on March 21, Hanin Majadli said the majority of Israelis oppose the war, think the war threatens hostages' lives and the fighting has been resumed for political reasons. However, they also reject that "Gazans are human, too." Consequently, "the majority of the people not only tolerate mass slaughter, but demand it, either explicitly or tacitly." There is "near total absence of reference to the war's consequences on Gaza and Gazans."

Published in 1918 under British tutelage and taken over in 1919 by Jewish leftists, Haaretz is Israel's oldest surviving newspaper and paper of record which has the third largest circulation in the country (72,000 and 100,000 on weekends). According to the Centre for Research Libraries, "Haaretz is considered the most influential and respected for both its news coverage and its commentary." The paper opposes the Israeli occupation of the 1967 conquered Palestinian territories and supports peacemaking efforts.

Haaretz does its best to "annoy readers" who do not want to recognise the humanity of Palestinians and reveal the inhumanity of Israel. Haaretz reported in detail the March 23rd Israeli army killing of Palestinian paramedics which has been extensively discussed in the Western media. Haaretz cite3d mobile phone images found in a mass grave containing the bodies of 15 Palestinian Red Crescent (PRC) paramedics and refuted the Israeli army's claim that they were shot in threatening vehicles traveling in the dark without headlights.

The New York Times had obtained and verified the material on the phone and reported that the (PRC) ambulances had headlights and flashing lights on. The Israeli army admitted the men wearing distinctive red PRC vests descended from the vehicles to check an ambulance abandoned earlier on the roadside. Nevertheless, the army said the soldiers shot them from a distance although a forensic examination found some had been shot at close quarters. One member of the UN rescue team allowed to access the site a week later told Haaretz that one body had his legs bound while Gaza's health ministry said others had their hands tied.

After the news had hit the media, the Israeli army claimed without evidence that six of the men killed were Hamas members. A report on the army's internal investigation was supposed to appear on Sunday April 6.

Haaretz was not alone in publishing a solid article on this incident. The Times of Israel carried an article by Emanuel Fabian and The Jerusalem Post a staff report on April 5. Website +972 also carried coverage of the attack. Since I cannot read Hebrew, I cannot assess what was in the Israeli Hebrew press. Perhaps this story was just too big and too controversial to miss or avoid.

No matter how it has been reported over the past 18 months, Israel's war on Gaza has enjoyed solid majority support in Israel despite accusations by Israeli and international human rights organisations that war crimes have been committed and referred to the International Criminal Court and the International Court of Justice.

A poll reported in The Times of Israel which was carried out by the Israeli Democracy Institute on October 7th, 2024, a year after Hamas attack on Israel, showed that 53 per cent of Israelis - but not Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu's "voter base" - said the time had come for the war to end while 36 per cent said it has not. Among right-wingers 61 per cent said the war should continue while 27 per cent favoured an end to the war. Eighty-three per cent on the left and 61 per cent in the centre wanted to halt the war.

The US Pew Research Centre reported on May 30th, eight months into the war that 39 per cent of Jewish Israelis said that Israel's Gaza war had been "about right" while 34 per cent said it had not gone far enough and 19 per cent said it had gone too far.

At the end of March this year, a poll aired by Channel 12 revealed 69 per cent of Israelis

support ending the Gaza war in exchange for the release of all hostages. Only 21 per cent reject such a deal. Among backers of Netanyahu's coalition 54 per cent were in favour while 32 per cent opposed.

As is the case everywhere, Israeli attitudes are formed by what they hear, read, and view, Israelis access news through newspapers, television channels, radio, and social media. The free tabloid Hebrew daily Israel Hayom, launched in 2007 by US casino billionaire Sheldon Adelson, is right-wing in its editorial policies. It is the most widely read newspaper. Ma'ariv is also right-leaning while Yedioth Ahronoth is centrist and critical of Netanyahu while Haaretz is left-liberal. While Israel has state operated television channels, the country has a multitude of private and paid channels. Social media also plays an influential role in dissemination of news and views in Israel.