How journalism died in Gaza

Journalism had already been dying for some time, yes, but its death certificate was signed on the night of the alleged bombing of Al-Ahli Hospital, when almost all the world's major media repeated, unverified, the version of the events as told by Hamas. "Israel bombs hospital and kills 500 Palestinians," the headlines read. Not one of those facts was true. But the scene was irresistible: at last, one could turn to the favorite story; that is, Israel, the perfect villain, and Gaza, the ideal victim. The truth came out days later, as an unwelcome guest. And some outlets, like El País, still refuse to open the door. Others bury the incident with platitudes and bizarre redefinitions capable of seeming empty to oblivion itself.

Gaza had become the stage on which the most profitable drama of the century was played out. The Guardian, El País and so many others transformed the coverage into a sort of moral reality, where the facts mattered less than the outcry. It was not information, it was emotional militancy. Every photo, every figure, every social media post by a "citizen journalist" served to shore up the "genocide" narrative—the redefinition, the trivialization. And when someone asked for evidence, they were singled out as an accomplice.

To justify what the evidence did not show, the International Association of Genocide Scholars (IAGS) came into the picture. Journalists and the media presented them as the top moral authority on crimes against humanity... "World's top scholars on the crime" headlined The Guardian; "World's leading experts," the BBC; "The largest professional organization of scholars studying genocide," according to the AP; "the largest global institution dedicated to the study of that crime" according to El País, and the list goes on.

"And in that hell, journalism gave up. Or at least mass journalism, with some honorable and brave exceptions."

But the reality was uncovered soon after, it was enough to pay $30 and have an internet connection to become "member" of this "prestigious" organization, and among its voters were names like Adolf Hitler and Emperor Palpatine. After the wild invasion of southern Israel by Hamas in October 2023, their membership nearly tripled, and yet they proclaimed Israel guilty of genocide, with a mere 28% turnout. Yet this is the kind of source the media loves because it seems serious, and actors and analysts quote it afterwards as if to make themselves sound knowledgeable. If it were not tragic, it would be comical, a pompous acronym was enough for the myth of "Israeli genocide" to dress up as scientific authority. The greatest authority, yes, but on scams: ideology and a registration fee.

Meanwhile, the figure of the journalist—the uncomfortable profession which has to contrast in order to doubt—disappeared. It was explained with surgical precision by French essayist Caroline Fourest on Franceinfo's “24h Pujadas” program. Many reporters knew that the information coming out of Gaza was false or at least dubious. "And for journalists it was hell. It was hell to resist it. First because we suffered a lot of intimidation, a lot of orders through social media, but also with politicians, with activists who insulted us every time we tried to oppose disinformation in the name of emotion."

And in that hell, journalism gave up. Or at least mass journalism, with some honorable and brave exceptions.

The most grotesque case was perhaps that of the Palestinian influencer known as "Mr. Fafo." He presented himself as a journalist—and sometimes as a nurse, or father or whatever it was in that cynical propaganda soap opera he played without disguising his duplicitous identity—but he was an expert activist in faking his death several times. His videos of supposed bombings went viral by the millions; his deaths, too. When he was actually killed, Greta Thunberg honored him as if he had been Kapuściński. But he was not killed by Israel, but by the Palestinians themselves, one of the factions now fighting for control of the Gaza Strip. That detail didn't make it into the script, though. The myth needed martyrs, not contradictions.

"The result was a double tragedy: a manipulated conflict and a dishonored profession. Gaza was the mirror in which Western journalism was finally seen for what it already was: a morality play."

The ceasefire brought with it one more opportunity for those media outlets to continue posturing. The press's perseverance as Hamas apologists could be seen after the signing of the agreement. In this sense, El País described summary executions in Gaza (Palestinians killed by Hamas) as an exhibition of "Hamas' authority on the streets," something that deserves to go down in the annals of journalistic euphemism. Horror turned into public order; barbarism disguised as governance.

Fourest spoke of a "faillite journalistique" (journalistic failure) and moral bankruptcy. And it was. Not only because many journalists shared propaganda, but because they stopped believing that their duty was to verify, to open the range of sources and voices. They adopted the numbers, the narrative and the grammar of activism: the truth no longer mattered, what mattered was being on "the right side." That is, the one they promoted. In the name of empathy, they resigned themselves to lie, because deceiving became the only way to tell their "truth." Straight out of Orwell.

The result was a double tragedy: a manipulated conflict and a dishonored profession. Gaza was the mirror where Western journalism was finally seen for what it already was: a theater of morality.

Because journalism did not die censored, nor silenced, nor repressed. It died of excess of emotion, of misunderstood empathy, of cowardice disguised as compassion. It died when it stopped looking to verify, and started looking to cry.