Coverage of the ongoing conflict between Israel and Palestinians has picked up since October 7th, and with it, the accusations that media outlets are presenting a biased picture of the violence unfolding in the region. Micah speaks with William Youmans, a professor of Media and Public Affairs at George Washington University, and Mona Chalabi, data journalist and illustrator, about studies that have tried to quantify the bias in coverage.
This is a segment from our March 1, 2024 show, Measuring Bias in Israel-Palestine Coverage, and Mehdi Hasan's Approach to Covering the Region.
In response to this segment we requested comment from spokespeople at The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Wall Street Journal, the LA Times, the BBC, NBC, CBS, ABC, FOX. Most did not respond. We received comments from The New York Times and the BBC and The Washington Post, which are available in-full below. We received the following statement from a spokesperson at The New York Times:
The New York Times has had a presence in Jerusalem for over a century. Since we first covered this conflict, we’ve received criticism and faced claims of bias from a number of directions, yet our reporting has unrelentingly displayed thoughtful nuance, historical context and rigorous devotion to the facts. Our reporters and editors are deeply experienced and committed to bringing our readers the fullest picture we can.
The New York Times has published a volume of reporting on this conflict that is comprehensive and unflinching. We have shone a light on the failures of the Israeli military and intelligence officials, analyzed Israel’s ground invasion through social media videos recorded by Israeli soldiers, and shared witness testimony to piece together the attacks. We have documented the death toll the Israeli response has visited on the civilians of Gaza. Our coverage bears witness to the unfolding atrocities and brings readers first-hand accounts from Palestinians and Israelis. We have shared personal stories from those held hostage, painted a portrait of life in Gaza following the Israeli invasion, shared first-hand accounts of life in the West Bank and documented the aftermath of the Hamas attacks through poignant portraits of survivors.
We received the following statement from a spokesperson at the BBC:
Throughout our reporting on the conflict the BBC has made clear the devastating human cost to civilians living in Gaza and Israel. We will continue to give careful thought in how we do this. We welcome scrutiny and reflect on all feedback.
The BBC was one of the few news organisations to have journalists inside Gaza, and they have provided on the ground reporting at considerable personal risk, including first-hand testimony and descriptions of what is happening. Our coverage of the conflict across all our platforms - TV and radio as well as online - has included stories of Palestinian victims and testimony from civilians, doctors and aid workers.
The algorithm does not provide insight into the context of the usage of particular words, either in relation to the attacks of 7 October or the Israeli offensive in Gaza. We do not think coverage can be assessed solely by counting particular words used and do not believe this analysis demonstrates bias.
We received the following statement from a spokesperson at The Washington Post:
The Washington Post has consistently published balanced and sophisticated coverage of the complex Middle East war over the past months in both its news and opinion reporting. We encourage readers to explore that coverage, despite existing misrepresentations.
