The war crimes being perpetrated in Gaza will likely go unpunished, so the moral obligation of the press is at least to ensure they are recorded in that first draft of history that journalism claims to be. The first step toward achieving this is to call a spade a spade. On March 23, the Israeli army opened fire on Palestinian ambulances and a fire truck. Later, the lifeless bodies of fifteen rescue workers were found in a mass grave. The initial reaction was to deny that this attack, which violates the Geneva Convention, had even taken place. But when a video emerged showing Israeli soldiers opening fire for five minutes on the vehicles—appropriately marked and with their lights on—the army was forced to swallow its version and rectify its position.
Some of the headlines these days speak of images "that apparently contradict..." or say that the army "admits that the story was partially 'wrong.'" It's obvious that Israel killed doctors and buried them to cover up this war crime. Citing the armed forces' second version in the terms they themselves have chosen to minimize this punishable act is like buying into their mentality. The apparent aseptic nature of recording what a source says ends up turning the person acting as an uncritical spokesperson into a necessary collaborator, even if only by omission. "Israel lied" is a harsh headline, but justified, and the media, on the other hand, generally resort to more administrative formulas. Surely some do so inadvertently, out of inertia, and others intentionally. But the result is that Netanyahu has greater cover for carrying out genocide if he is only pointed out peripherally and indirectly.
