News organization says journalists should refer to its former officemates as ‘militants’
(Getty Images)
The Associated Press has issued a controversial directive to reporters and organizations that follow its style guide. According to a review by the Washington Free Beacon, the news outlet advises against labeling Hamas as a terrorist organization. This guidance will have a significant impact on how the ongoing conflict in Gaza is reported by numerous regional and national media outlets, including Politico.
In its “Israel-Hamas Topical Guide”, the AP explains that it avoids using terms like “terrorism” and “terrorist” due to their politicization and inconsistent application. Instead, the organization suggests referring to specific actions or groups in direct quotations only. This means that Hamas, a group dedicated to the annihilation of Israel and Jews worldwide, should be referred to as “militants” by journalists.
While dozens of countries, including the United States and the European Union, classify Hamas as a terrorist organization, the AP’s stance challenges this widely accepted designation. The group has been responsible for numerous terrorist attacks against civilians since 1993, as documented by the Jewish Virtual Library.
The Associated Press style guide suggests alternative terms such as “Hamas fighters,” “attackers,” or “combatants” depending on the context. However, the news organization has not responded to requests for comment regarding this controversial decision.
This is not the first time the Associated Press has made questionable choices. It was revealed that the AP once shared office space in Gaza with Hamas, an arrangement that lasted for 15 years until Israeli airstrikes destroyed the building in May 2021. The Israeli Defense Force claimed that the building housed Hamas operatives, weapons, and even an office for Islamic Jihad, another terrorist organization based in Gaza.
While the AP condemned the destruction of the building, an Israeli Defense Force source stated that Associated Press reporters were aware of their neighbors’ true identities. In fact, back in 2014, The Atlantic reported that AP staffers in the Gaza office witnessed terrorists launching rockets into Israel from nearby. Shockingly, the AP never reported these rocket launches, endangering their own staff and nearby civilians.
The Associated Press has a history of attempting to influence media coverage by policing language. For instance, earlier this year, the AP released new guidance related to immigration, discouraging the use of the word ”surge” to describe the influx of illegal aliens at the southern border. Similarly, during the aftermath of George Floyd’s death in 2020, the AP suggested using “milder terms” like “unrest” instead of “riots” to describe the widespread looting and destruction.
What are the arguments made by the news organization in favor of using the term ”militants” instead of “terrorists” in reporting on Hamas?
Directive challenges this classification. The news organization argues that using the term “militants” instead of “terrorists” allows for more nuance and accuracy in reporting. They also state that their approach aligns with the principles of fairness and impartiality in journalism.
The decision by the AP has sparked a debate among journalists and media organizations. Critics argue that this directive undermines the reality of Hamas’ actions and its role in the conflict. They believe that using the term “militants” downplays the severity of their activities, which include rocket attacks on Israeli civilians and the use of human shields.
Proponents of the AP’s guidance argue that it is a necessary step towards unbiased reporting. They argue that the term “terrorism” is often used in a subjective manner, depending on one’s perspective and political leanings. By avoiding the use of loaded language, journalists can focus on the facts and provide a more objective account of events.
However, this approach raises questions about the role of journalists in determining the terminology used to describe violent groups or actions. It is the responsibility of journalists to provide accurate and unbiased information, but should they have the authority to redefine commonly accepted terms and classifications?
Furthermore, this directive casts doubt on the credibility and objectivity of the AP as a news organization. The excessive concern for neutrality can lead to a distortion of facts and an avoidance of calling out actions that are universally condemned. Journalists have a duty to hold those in power accountable and provide a voice to the victims of violence.
The ongoing conflict between Israel and Hamas is a highly sensitive and complex issue. The language used by journalists plays a crucial role in shaping public perception and understanding of events. It is vital for news organizations to exercise caution and responsibility when determining the terminology to be used.
In conclusion, the AP’s directive regarding the labeling of Hamas as “militants” instead of “terrorists” is a controversial decision that has significant implications for the reporting of the conflict in Gaza. While the aim may be to promote fairness and impartiality, it raises concerns about the objectivity and credibility of the news organization. Journalists must strive to provide accurate and unbiased information while ensuring that they do not shy away from holding accountable those who commit acts of violence.
Now loading...