Reuters is losing credibility. Case-study: Reuters ‘Crisis In Gaza’ pictorial report

international | anti-war / imperialism | opinion/analysis Friday January 09, 2009 16:51 by A Meagher

Another reason to be grateful for Indymedia and community media outlets.

I logged onto Reuters to see photo-reports that would inform me in-depth about the latest in the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. I was disappointed and wrote to the agency to complain, saying: Your war coverage (I viewed 56 ‘Crisis in Gaza’ photographs published on January 8th) is dishonest and factually incorrect in purporting to show that "both sides" are suffering greatly.

Instead of getting an insight, I got “balanced reporting”; 28 photographs focus on the Palestinian’s experience, while 27 feature the Israelis’. There are 8 photographs of Palestinians in mourning and 5 to 6 show Israelis in mourning.

Reuters is losing credibility.
- RE ‘Crisis In Gaza’ pictorial report
I logged onto Reuters to see photo-reports that would inform me in-depth about the latest in the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. I was disappointed and wrote to the agency to complain, saying: Your war coverage (I viewed 56 ‘Crisis in Gaza’ photographs published on January 8th) is dishonest and factually incorrect in purporting to show that "both sides" are suffering greatly. Instead of getting an insight, I got “balanced reporting”; 28 photographs focus on the Palestinian’s experience, while 27 feature the Israelis’. There are 8 photographs of Palestinians in mourning and 5 to 6 show Israelis in mourning.

In terms of wounded, you present 2 photographs of Israelis “wounded” and 3 of Palestinians. I’m aware that over 700 Palestinians and 11 or so Israelis have died since the bombing of Gaza began. If I was in the dark on the statistics, I would be led to think by Reuter’s photographic “evidence” that was a tit-for-tat war.

You do not get an inkling that close to 300 Palestinian children have died. When children are dying in huge numbers in their own homes and neighbourhoods, the media have a duty to pay attention.

Judging from the ‘Crisis In Gaza’ photographs, you would not realise the scale and one-sidedness of the suffering. Are the people managing Reuters more interested in showing people what you think they’d like to see or showing them what is actually happening? Reuters has been in existence for so long, it is sad to see it’s professionalism crumble before one’s eyes.

Your pictorial report features 5 photographs of Palestinians fleeing or seeking shelter and 4 photographs of Israelis doing the same.

The wording of the captions is interesting. It tells me that Israelis like to pray and Palestinians like to shout. I wish the wording was better thought-out. There are 2 photographs of Israelis “praying”, while 3 pictures feature Palestinians who are “shouting” or “reacting” (they have their arms outstretched and are calling out).

The captions for the Israelis killed do not mention how they died, with the inference being they died from Palestinian fire. However, and I had to bear this in mind while viewing the photographs, since the bombing of Gaza began, half or more of the Israelis who have been killed died under “friendly fire”.

News coverage should be straightforward. If it was a rugby match and the scoreline was 50-0 (as was the score in Ireland V Canada in November) Reuters would probably use an analogy and might say it was a bloodbath.

I’m sure that Hamas would like to kill many Israelis, but the truth is they are not managing to do so in anything close to the numbers the Israelis are slaughtering people.

Including “friendly-fire” casualities, the Israeli military has killed 99.3% of the dead to date. If you want true editorial balance, you could start by reflecting this near-total imbalance in your next pictorial report.

It is inappropriate to adopt a "balanced reporting" approach to this news story. One side is decimating the other (half them children) and your photos - evenly splitting casualty photos from "both sides" is professionally inappropriate, morally wrong and factually rubbish.

Finally, and without wanting to lose you completely, what’s with the wording ‘Crisis in Gaza’? It’s not a crisis, it’s a war, an attack, a bombing. The crisis is throughout Palestine and Israel.

Reuters has lost credibility, in my estimation.
- Allen Meagher.

Note: I write as a journalist concerned about falling standards within the profession and as a parent worried for every family in Israel and Palestine.