Who Can We Believe?
Israel has committed crimes against humanity in Gaza. Or so said Human Rights Watch in its latest report, which topped news bulletins worldwide last month. At this point, my honest first response was: “Isn’t Human Rights Watch known for being quite anti-Israel?” Because it is, isn’t it? Right up there with Amnesty International, which chose the anniversary of the October 7th massacre to remind the world that the Israel-Palestine conflict “didn’t begin on 7 October”.
With that in mind, it seemed almost controversial that the BBC introduced Human Rights Watch simply as a “leading rights NGO”. Not that it isn’t true; it’s just not the full story, is it?
Ever since last year’s attack, those of us who listen to the BBC have been told on an almost daily basis that Israel has been killing Palestinians, the majority of whom have been women and children. Yet each time, the statistic is followed by the troubling clarification: “according to the Hamas-run Health Ministry”. Which immediately puts the listener in a difficult position. No one wants to hear that any - let alone many - innocent women and children have been killed, and certainly not every day, but each time the word “Hamas” appears as the source, a doubt is raised.
Meanwhile, those on the pro-Israel side tell us Hamas shelters among civilians intentionally and that despite what we are being told, Israel considers every civilian life a tragedy and is doing its best to avoid them. Some have even gone so far as to praise Israel for prosecuting its war in an unprecedentedly careful manner, for example by warning civilians ahead of strikes, although that certainly doesn’t appear to be the mainstream view.
In sharp contrast, those on the Palestinian side tell us Israel is committing a “genocide” i.e. that they are in fact intentionally killing Palestinians simply because they are Palestinians.
When both sides tell such different stories, what is Joe Public supposed to make of it all? Good journalists and news organizations are supposed to tell the news impartially, but when both sides present such opposing narratives, how are those of us who did not know much about Israel-Palestine before October 7th supposed to know what to believe?
What are we, for example, to make of UNWRA? Are they a credible UN agency, as Palestinians tell us, or Hamas in disguise? Is Antonio Guterres the next Nelson Mandela or, as some on the Israeli side would seem to suggest, more akin to a modern-day Adolf Hitler?
The decision of the International Criminal Court to issue arrest warrants for Israel’s prime minister and former defense minister - with the Islamic Republic of Iran cheering on from the sidelines - has added further complexity to the challenge of knowing what to make of it all.
Prior to October 7th, the Russia-Ukraine conflict was perhaps the most obvious previous example of a daily news event in which the spokespeople for the two opposing sides painted such contrasting pictures of reality, though one supposes that in that instance far fewer found it so difficult to know which side to trust.
The US elections and their aftermath have presented us with another challenge. Are Trump’s new picks for the White House to be understood as far-right, Christian nationalists, or are they just conservatives with American accents and other traits that might make them appear slightly kooky to some of us on the other side of the Atlantic?
Iran, as ever, provides another example, with which I’ll conclude. Always with its hand in the game, on some occasions, it appears as though it is desperate to make an appearance in every global news bulletin, Iran is a master of modern propaganda warfare.
Take its “hundreds of churches” and “religious-minority representatives in the parliament”. Did you hear about those? If you pay any attention to Iran and what’s said about Iran on social media, I’d be surprised if you hadn’t. Nearly every day, I see video clips shared of the Supreme Leader, Ali Khamenei, enjoying a cup of tea with an elderly Christian couple, whose child was killed fighting for the Islamic Republic. There’s usually a Christmas tree in the background.
The message is clear: here is Khamenei, celebrating Christmas with a religious minority, and drinking tea with them! He really must love Christians! Don’t let all that “Western propaganda” about the “persecution” of Christians and other religious minorities lead you astray!
You can guarantee that such clips will circulate ever more frequently in the run-up to Christmas, as will images of Iranians outside shops full of Christmas trees and Santa Clauses. Again, the message is simple: don’t trust what the West is telling you; we love Christians and Christmas here! And they are completely free!
And yet, every year at Christmas, dozens of Iranian Christians will be arrested. There’s always an increase at Christmas time. Last year 46 out of a total of 166 documented arrests took place in December.
But don’t worry, here’s Khamenei drinking tea with another Christian family. (Or maybe it’s the same one. I’ve never paid close attention.) And here’s Khamenei’s official X account wishing every Christian citizen a happy Christmas. So I guess everything’s fine, right?
Some propaganda, as with the Iranians and Russians, is easier to spot. Others, dare I say like that of certain NGOs, is harder to navigate, while it seems to me that the majority of mainstream news outlets these days don’t make it any easier for those of us trying to work out which side we can trust.
Life seems harder for the modern-day journalist and by virtue of that the consumer too. No longer does news appear to be about simply telling facts in a measured, balanced, dispassionate way; increasingly, a value judgment also appears to be expected. Perhaps it’s the influence of the TalkTV and GB News programs of this world, though some might argue that the more left-wing outlets, like Channel 4 or the BBC, have long been moving in the same direction.
Perhaps it’s the fault of modern politics. When the politicians are increasingly at each other’s throats, why should we be surprised when the newscasters follow suit? It’s almost as if we now have the Conservatives v Labour and Republicans v Democrats debates on our screens, as well as in our parliaments.
Perhaps it was ever thus. But one thing appears clear: where the conclusion is hotly contested, or the instigator of the story controversial, both journalists and consumers have their work cut out today in working out who to believe.
Wrong Speak is a free-expression platform that allows varying viewpoints. All views expressed in this article are the author's own.
 | A guest post by
|
As a rule of thumb, one shouldn’t believe the Bronze Age Barbarians who keep sex slaves and execute gays.
Good points. I would suggest you look into the Russian situation in more detail before deciding where the propaganda is coming from. Notably you had no illustrations there.