Introduction
Unlike most other geopolitical issues that are either of concise duration or regarded as unnecessary, the Israel-Palestine conflict is a tough and complicated one that has gained a lot of media attention. The relationship between the American Government and Israel, which is closely knit, is of greater focus on the media issues and how they shape public perceptions of the conflict in the USA. This literature review analyzes the results and outcomes of the quantitative study by Adam Johnson and Othman Ali, as described in their article entitled “The Coverage of Gaza War in The New York Times and the Other Major Newspapers Heavy Favored Israel, Analysis Shows.” The review takes a closer look at the way the authors explored how major U.S. newspapers, including The New York Times, The Washington Post, and The
Biases in Media Coverage
The detailed study carried out by Johnson and Ali has shown the concerning fact that papers like The New York Times, The Washington Post, and The Los Angeles Times have a misplaced emphasis on the Israeli commentary in the media, which has resulted in the dominance of the Israeli narrative over the Palestinian story to the extent that the actual reality of the Palestinian strives has become an afterthought (Johnson & Ali, 2024). The newspapers that were published through the conflict would not fail to mention only the suffering of the Palestinians but instead would resound with the Israeli narratives, effectively suppressing the stories of the Palestinian victims. The apparent bias shows in the marking by the terms “Israeli” and “Israeli” higher than in “Palestinian.” Consequently, the picture is presented as skewed. Another deliberate choice by the author is the discriminatory use of emotive language, as “slaughter” and “massacre” are descriptive only of Israeli deaths. This perpetuates a narrative of Israeli victims and dehumanizes Palestinian casualties. In this case, the media illustrates the conflict inaccurately, not only the ground conditions but also the narrative that is hidden in the uneven distribution of power and distorts the efforts to achieve peace and justice among the people in the region.
Neglect of Palestinian Victims
The analysis conducted by Johnson and Ali underscores a disturbing trend in media coverage: somewhat restricted representation of the Palestinian victims, most of all the children and journalists. Palestinian death counts marked one of the most horrific battle transcriptions. Unfortunately, media giants of that time gave far more attention to the plight of the Israeli side at the expense of the innocent Palestinian children. On the other hand, Israeli kids got sweet publicity, being portrayed in sad accounts in which each of them was detailed. In the same context, Palestinian children were not necessarily attractive to the journalists to write exclusively about them, as was in some cases where each one of them was not singled out.
This disparity above is undoubtedly manifested as a prominent point when it comes to counting how many Palestinian kids were slaughtered during the confrontation (Johnson & Ali, 2024). Wrongful killings of those innocent souls would be quickly covered in the media, but Egyptians remained indifferent as if what happened was not so terrible. Meaningful lack of Palestinian children’s victims of the conflict suffering recognition after the thoughts will continue their dehumanization process plus the problems of getting the value of human lives losses. Similarly, the deaths of the Palestinian journalists, who covered the stories from the main field and revealed the situations within the conflict, received almost no coverage or attention from the major outlets. At the risk of their life, a journalist with impartial attitudes have faced those dangers but do not always get their sacrifices due attention or no more than a short mention in media reports. The attitude of Israel toward Palestinian journalists being disregarded deepens the one-sided coverage as well as brings to the fore systemic bias among media practitioners who often cast coverage in such a way as to favor Israel against the Palestinians, thereby exposing the two sides’ irreconcilable positions. Through their capitalization to treat Pennsylvania victims unequally with Palestinian children and journalists, the media not only enhances the relative position of Palestinians but also artificially states a story that veils the actual human toll of the conflict. Working toward the goal of justice for Palestinian victims and emphasizing their stories and experiences in the narratives of the people will be very necessary to ensure a more just and humane chat in relation to the conflict between Israel – and Palestine (Johnson & Ali, 2024).
Framing and Language
The language of U.S. media outlets in their coverage of the Israel-Palestine conflict is not easy and comfortable but consciously used as a powerful tool to make people see the situation differently. The contrastive approach by Johnson and Ali allows the viewers to see the same image from two perspectives. They first examine the power of framing and then unveil the underlying Israeli-centric narrative that devalues the Palestinian narrative. Part of this portrayal uses phrases such as “war” or “conflict,” which nevertheless create an appearance of parity between the two sides, while the reality is a deep-rooted power disparity between the two. Such neutral words utilized by the media do not reflect the actual structure of the conflict, which brings violation of human rights and inequality, so it is a direct means that will cause partial interpretation of the general context of occupation and dispossession of Palestinians. The employment of the passive voice throughout the news articles to explain Palestinian casualties feeds the falsehood of the story together (Johnson & Ali, 2024). By incessant reflection of the Palestinian deaths as chance or unintentional results of the conflict, the media eliminates for the Israeli forces their responsibility and liability to civilians. Through this term of expression, we see the moral clear-cutting from Israeli actions made, and the myth of Israeli exceptionalism, according to which the state is described as an unwilling force in a tragedy with a logically unavoidable ending, is maintained. The historical struggle of Palestinians for liberation and independence is always associated with the negative image of terrorists and fanatics. As a result, this selective approach contributes to the creation of stereotypes and biases that justify Israel’s domination in the region and the mistreatment of the Palestinians. This framing is untrue as it is not possible to portray war better. Also, these narratives generate narratives that could be justifiable for the actions of the Israeli military and also normalize the ongoing occupation of the Palestinian territories. The emphasis and the choice of words by the prominent U.S. newspapers stay in the line, making it easier to hide the issue’s natural causes and the unbalanced power relations. This can be achieved through challenging these linguistic conventions, which in turn might lead to the prioritization of the voices and experiences of Palestinians by the media. Hence, the media can contribute to constructing a more balanced and accurate understanding of the Israel-Palestine conflict (Johnson & Ali, 2024). The biased and unbalanced news coverage of the Israel-Palestine conflict by the major U.S. newspapers is very significant in terms of establishing public opinion and in the policymaking process. By presenting Israelis’ point of view and shortening Palestinians’ ongoing problems, journalists help shape an inaccurate coverage of the conflict in the eyes of the American audience. This further explains the factors that shape the opinion of political leaders and the policymaking methods, creating the rock-hard base for their unquestionable support of the nation and blurring the issues that originate the conflict. In addition, the difference between news consumption of different generations that the clients of social media get information from news sources can indicate a move of new news landscape in which political stories other than the one originating from mainstream media are prevailing and exerting pressure on those (Johnson & Ali, 2024).
Conclusion
The literary review here is the media highlighting the United States’s role in dominating the globe. Bias, narrative framing, and language usage in the leading edition news longer narratives in favor of the narrative of the Israeli side while on the one hand silence Palestinian vices and experiences on the other hand. This is especially true regarding the unfair representation, which not only gives a false idea in the minds of ordinary people but also promotes systemic inequalities and hinders the achievement of a reasonable and sustainable way out of the conflict. To sum up, several things are at stake now, including media literacy, diversifying sources of information, and amplifying marginalized perspectives to promote constructive and equally balanced debate on the Israel-Palestine issue.
References
Johnson, A., & Ali, O. (2024, January 9). Coverage of Gaza War in the New York Times and Other Major Newspapers Heavily Favored Israel, Analysis Shows. The Intercept. https://theintercept.com/2024/01/09/newspapers-israel-palestine-bias-new-york-times/
write