Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Israeli media coverage of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is often accused of bias that skews public discourse in ways favoring hardline Zionist policy goals. This study analyzes news articles from the Times of Israel, Israel Hayom, and Jerusalem Post covering October 2023 violence to understand how language and framing shape understandings and political dynamics. A critical discourse analysis of 34 selected news articles published between October 7-30, 2023 was conducted using the CDA framework to uncover underlying ideological elements and their potential effects. The findings illuminated how certain outlets strategically frame information to reinforce unilateral policy preferences over collaborative solutions. By normalizing disproportionate responses to acts of resistance and denying the humanity of those contesting Zionist territorial ambitions. The Times of Israel and Israel Hayom frame narratives to consolidate unilateral Zionist control and normalize militarized policies. Jerusalem Post aims to build a pro-Israel narrative through political language and ‘us vs. them’ framing. Strategic omissions deny Palestinian grievances and legitimacy, while emotive reporting justifies disproportionate force. The studied media construct narrow nationalist discourses that delegitimize Palestinian perspectives and fuel intractability. Reforms are needed to diversify sourcing and fact-check distortions to curb biases exacerbating political polarization rather than reconciliation.
Barari et al. (Tue,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: