This Israeli war on Palestinians in Gaza is not like any other war, as Palestinians — and other Arabs for that matter — are the targets of repeated Israeli attacks. Though media has always been an important element in revealing atrocities committed by Israel against the innocent population and combating manipulation by any party to cover-up wrongdoing, this time, its role is different. Moreover, though social media was present in other recent wars, its use this time is much different. First, warring parties are using social media for their campaign, propaganda and even “disinformation”. The public is also using social media more in either exposing atrocities committed by Israel against innocent Palestinians in Gaza, including women and children, or trying to gain sympathy for ‘peaceful’ Israeli citizens in shock as they fear rockets from Gaza. The war taking on Twitter and Facebook is actually shaping public opinion in favour of the oppressed against the occupier — we are seeing Palestinians getting killed in droves, while Israelis are cheering and watching the “war game”.
Social media is also revealing, as the global public is becoming more used to getting all the news from it rather than from traditional media channels. Take for example the British Liberal Democrat member of parliament who tweeted that if he was living in Gaza he would probably fire rockets on Israel. His party apologised and he toured traditional media outlets to explain what he meant in his tweet, but the reaction to what he posted registered and his Radio or TV interviews did not change much of the perception it generated. Also, the local French politician from the far-right who tweeted a racist comment on a picture of a Palestinian child killed in Israeli bombing, saying it’s “halal meat”. All efforts at damage control following such an outrageous tweet did not mend the negative effect, even though it was said that his account was hacked or that it was fake. Celebrities have used their social media accounts to gain more notoriety by expressing strong views. These are examples of how social media has made an impact on the international view towards the war on Gaza.
Yet, it is not just social media, but traditional media outlets too have been instrumental in making a wider impact. Major international media organisations that claim objectivity and impartiality have suffered as the bias towards Israel has been clearly jeopardising all claims of fairness. Well-known networks like Fox News and the like have stuck to their line, while others that tried to be fair failed as they could not risk being targeted by Israeli supporters in their respective countries. This applies to most North American, Australian and other media outlets. Though some tried to balance the biased coverage, as political satire star John Stewart tried to do through farcical comparisons between helpless Gazans and comfortable Israelis, the mainstream coverage is biased in favour of the aggressor. Major international media outlets have failed to regain the credibility that had been lost in the last few years. Even though some sensational examples have become viral on social media — for instance, the Russia Today announcer who lambasted “West’s bias against Gazans” — they did not tilt the balance and most looked out of context.
When it comes to the regional media scene, war became actually more decisive in ‘differential diagnosis’ of the Arab media malaise. Sensational, patronising and editorialising outlets that lost some ground in the last couple of years tried to make up for the loss through their Gaza war coverage. Initial observation after almost three weeks of war indicates that not much has changed, except for nascent outlets that started recently and chose to fill the gap between politically-slanted media. Still, in terms of building credibility, these new outlets may help strike a balance between distorted traditional media and unreliable social media.
As the saying goes: The first victim of war is truth and the media is supposedly the vehicle of conveying truth to the public. Undoubtedly, media is also a tool to victimise truth in wars and consequently suffers from the consequences it has helped develop. This applies to both social media and traditional media. While Social media is not yet considered reliable and accountable, traditional media may suffer the biggest loss in terms of its credibility. Here, the media outlet that comes out relatively credible in war coverage will gain the most and may even garner the trust that others have lost.
Dr Ahmad Mustafa is an Abu Dhabi-based journalist.
