16 thoughts on “Gaza and the Failure of Mass Media”

1. ‘Billions witness livestreamed massacres, children pulled from rubble, and entire neighbourhoods flattened yet visibility yields no action.’
   I had been struggling to articulate my feelings toward the apathetic responses of the new audiences towards Palestine, but this line perfectly encapsulates what I had been thinking of. The constant overflow of media at all times and from all ends has made audiences impassive towards violent images, to the point where, despite being the most documented genocide in history, it still feels like so many remain wilfully ignorant. And the ones who do attempt to speak up are silenced. This creates, as you mentioned, the ‘paradox, of hyper-documentation alongside silence, denial, and complicity from institutions of power’.

   I am also very impressed at how well researched this blog is. With the amount of resources linked, the article almost feels like an archive of sorts. Additionally, I think the reference to cancel culture in regards to supporters of Palestinians is very clever. It is ironic how the term, typically used mockingly against leftists, has been used here to describe the silencing of pro-Palestinian voices.

   1. Thank you so much for your thoughtful comment! What you said really made me reflect. I believe that after nearly two years of mass eradication (and 77 years of illegal occupation and displacement), war crimes committed in plain sight, and international law violated without any consequence, ignorance can no longer be excused. This is no longer just about Gaza, it reveals the failure of an entire global system that enables and funds settler-colonial violence while hiding behind so-called “neutral” media narratives. The excuse of “it’s complicated” or “I’m neutral” is no longer valid.

      Neutrality in the face of genocide is complicity. Period.

      On your point about cancel culture, it’s so ironic and insane to me that the very people who claim to defend “free speech” are the very ones silencing, firing, doxxing, and destroying the lives of anyone who dares speak against genocide, against mass slaughter, against the bombing of hospitals and the killing of babies. Gaza has made the hypocrisy so naked it’s almost surreal. It has exposed how hollow those claims are and how international human rights are treated as selective, full of double standards and applied only when convenient. What we are seeing is that “rights” and “freedom” collapse the moment they challenge power.

2. This is such an important and well-researched post. “Never before has a genocide been both the most documented in history and the first ever livestreamed in real time. And never before has the world scrolled past such unthinkable horror.” This opening line really struck me, since, as alarming as it is, it could not be more true. This post reminded me about the documentary No Other Land. The film received critical acclaim when it was released, and won an Oscar for Best Documentary Feature at this year’s Academy Awards. I found out a while back on social media that a Palestinian activist, Odeh Hathalin, who worked on the film, was shot and killed by an Israeli settler. As I tried to research more about his death, I was extremely shocked and upset to see how little coverage there had been, especially from major news outlets. This displays the disturbing paradox you wrote about. We are witnessing both global recognition (visibility for the documentary) and institutional silence (little to no coverage on Odeh Hathalin’s death). There is a genocide that is unfolding in full view, yet it is being met with denial and indifference by those in power. Really great job on this post, it was super insightful and very well written!

   1. Thank you so much, Lucy, for your kind words and for bringing up the No Other Land documentary. It’s absolutely insane and unbelievable, the impunity, the audacity. A filmmaker whose work was celebrated on the world stage is shot dead by an illegal settler on stolen land, and yet no one is held accountable. No consequences. This should be breaking news everywhere yet it’s buried in silence.

      That silence is the most telling part. It shows how Palestinian lives are so deeply dehumanized, how recognition is only granted when it’s convenient, and how even the killing of someone tied to an Oscar-winning film is met with indifference. The hypocrisy is staggering. This is the reality of the illegal Israeli occupation: 77 years of land theft, displacement, ethnic cleansing, and the daily expansion of illegal settlements in the West Bank and occupied Palestine. Israeli settlers harass and kill Palestinians with full protection from the military.

      Odeh was in his own village, Umm al-Khair, when Israeli bulldozers (operated by Israeli settlers) came in to cut olive trees and destroy the water pipes that served his community. He was filming them from a distance when an Israeli settler deliberately shot him in the chest. After his murder, occupation soldiers arrested his family members and other Palestinian activists from the village instead of the actual criminal. And just a week later, the settler, the killer, was back in the same area as if nothing had happened.

      I’m sorry, what? In what world is this acceptable? In what world can this be anything but state-sanctioned impunity?

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eeK6iFZe1GU
      Here’s the video.

3. Hi Maryam,

   I found your blog post to not only be moving, but extremely educational and informative. Similarly to “inshaa”, I found this article to act as an archive. Specifically, this piece reminded me of this article mentioned in my GEOG 342: Post- and Anticolonial Geography course titled, “Orientalising Palestine: A Digital Archive” (https://isisnaucratis.medium.com/orientalising-palestine-a-digital-archive-a6bd09fa1525 ).

   Both your article and the linked archive above demonstrate the biases of western mass media and its promotion of Israel as a just, righteous power.

   I found it especially powerful that you defined the medium amidst the war as “power”. Rather than conveying the medium as a simple, tangible object like a camera, a photo collection, or a piece of news media, the medium is a much more insidious and institutionalized force. As you quote, the medium of power “decide[s] what circulates” and “what is erased”. This quote reminded me of this Instagram post (https://www.instagram.com/p/CydbE5sutDQ/?igshid=MzRlODBiNWFlZA%3D%3D ) featuring two strikingly different ChatGPT responses from a user asking the same question about Israelis and Palestinians. I believe this demonstrates how even internet algorithms–the mere channels that host mass media–can use their power as a medium to instill biased perceptions of this war.

   Lastly, I found your view of “solidarity” as the “counter-medium” to power to be especially important. In a time where mass media is more deceptive than ever, it is important to think critically about who is producing the media we consume and how they might benefit from the circulation of their works. Most importantly, as you state, we must choose for ourselves “whether to reproduce power’s narratives or to challenge them”.

   1. Emily, thank you so much for your kind and insightful comment. I really appreciate you connecting my post to both your course and the archive you shared! I had a look, and it’s such an important project for exposing how Palestine has been consistently orientalized and misrepresented through Western media frameworks. I loved it. That archival work is crucial because it shows that media bias is not new at all. It’s systemic, with deep roots throughout history and it helps explain why even today, narratives remain so skewed.

      I also really resonate with your point about algorithms as mediums of power. That Instagram example you shared is alarming but not surprising. It’s such a clear example of how even the platforms we rely on for information or tools we assume to be “neutral” are embedded with biases and certain agendas that replicate dominant power structures. To me, that’s exactly what makes “power” such a pervasive medium. It controls what gets published in mainstream outlets but also operates through invisible systems (algorithms, institutional filters, censorship) that shape what we see and what gets silenced, and in turn, shape public opinion.

      I have actually come across reports that the Israeli occupation has invested millions of dollars to game ChatGPT and other AI tools into reproducing pro-Israel narratives for Gen Z audiences. I think this is insane but not surprising. It’s yet another reminder that even emerging technologies are not neutral spaces. They’re contested terrains where power scripts the narrative. And honestly, imagine being this desperate, pouring millions into manipulating algorithms because the unfiltered truth of what’s happening in Palestine is so horrific that, if people saw it plainly, the colonial state wouldn’t be able to justify its actions.

      https://thecradle.co/articles/israel-invests-millions-to-game-chatgpt-into-replicating-pro-israel-content-for-gen-z-audiences

      That’s why I keep coming back to solidarity and awareness as a counter-medium, as you mentioned. It’s one of the few forces that can break through those structures because it’s about amplifying the truth and refusing silence. For me, it’s powerful to think that every repost, every act of refusal to accept the dominant narrative, every choice to dig deeper and learn, is part of building that counter-medium. Yeah, it may not dismantle the corrupt system overnight, but it keeps the cracks widening, and the truth will inevitably break through. Choosing to challenge and resist rather than reproduce those narratives of power feels like the most urgent responsibility we carry right now.

4. This is a beautifully written post, Maryam, and I appreciate you not shying away or sanitizing your own language or emotion for the sake of a school project. Over the long history of brutality imposed upon Palestine since 1948 (although truly much longer, dating back to the Hussein-McMahon correspondence in 1915, regarding the promised — yet never delivered — independent Arab state in exchange for the Arab Revolt, essential in the overthrow of the Ottoman Empire), there have been many evolutions in the technology as well as conventions of mass-media. I wonder how you compare the global narrative and consciousness regarding Palestine in the 1940s/1950s versus today?
   I think this can be analyzed via two specific sectors you referenced in this post: the narrative (as presented by the dominant media) and the consciousness (represented by the cultural sentiment, in this case, cancel culture). The mass media narrative has evolved in three primary ways: immediacy, reach, and diversity of sources. As we evolved into an online world, we are now able to access the most current news updates at any moment (besides the daily paper or nightly radio/TV show) and these updates may come (hypothetically, ignoring censorship) from any media source, anywhere in the world. Sources and content of what is occurring on the ground can now come from anyone, as most people carry cameras — in the form of phones — with us at all times. Yet, despite these developments, there remain a handful of key sources with essentially a monopoly on mainstream media. Do you think the mainstream narrative has evolved to be more empathetic to Palestine in response to these technical developments and increased visibility?
   Secondly, in regard to public consciousness and cancel culture, this is not necessarily a new notion. We saw the significance of public bias to the side of Israel before its official status as a state in 1948; the public support for the World Zionist Movement during the five Aliyahs which established a Jewish population in that territory that would become the state of Israel. There was an effective cancel culture (although no such label existed yet) to anyone opposed to the right to a Jewish homeland as deserved/earned in the wake of WWII. Now, under a global media space, we have access to more content outside of echo chambers. Do you see the current cancel culture as an evolution of this original international Zionist bias or as a new development reflective of our modern culture?

   1. Sydney, thank you so much for your kind words and really thoughtful comment. You raised very important angles, I appreciate it! You’re right that the shifts in immediacy, reach, and diversity of sources have transformed how Palestine is narrated and perceived. During the Nakba, the dominant story came almost exclusively from Western outlets echoing Zionist narratives, with very little Palestinian voice reaching the outside world. Today, while mainstream media still operates under those same structural biases and agendas, Palestinians themselves can now document and broadcast in real time. Technology has collapsed the barrier of time and space. And that visibility makes it harder for the monopoly of a few outlets to fully control the narrative.

      As for whether the mainstream narrative has become more empathetic, I’d say only partially and often conditionally. Sympathy spikes when the violence is undeniable as we have witnessed, especially in the last 2 years, but the deeper framing of Palestinians as dehumanized or “conflict-bound” still persists. The system of who gets heard hasn’t shifted as much as we’d hope, it’s just that the cracks are more visible now. Social media feels like a double-edged sword, it amplifies Palestinian voices like never before but it also lays bare the scale of censorship and manipulation. And with the ongoing genocide and war crimes on an unprecedented scale, the urgency of breaking through those narratives has never been greater. The solidarity movements across the world we see today are unlike anything witnessed in the past 77 years of Zionist settler-colonialism in Palestine.

      On cancel culture, I agree it isn’t new. There’s a long history of silencing and punishing those who spoke against Zionism especially post-WWII when opposing a Jewish state was framed as morally indefensible. What we see now is both a continuation of that legacy and a new form shaped by social media. Palestinians and allies can push back publicly in ways that were unimaginable before. But the risks (job loss, surveillance, deplatforming, etc) remain very real. A big part of this silencing comes from conflating criticism of Israel and Zionism with antisemitism. That label is weaponized to shut down and delegitimize pro-Palestinian voices, when in reality, opposing a colonial state built on the ethnic cleansing of an indigenous population is not the same as hatred toward Jewish people. It’s a demand for justice and for liberation, and I think equating that with bigotry is both dishonest and very dangerous.

      So I think we’re living through both threads at once: the persistence of an old bias that delegitimizes Palestinian voices, and the emergence of digital spaces where those voices are harder to suppress. What feels different now is how much more people are seeing through the propaganda, even the carefully polished image of Israel that’s been cultivated for decades. That mask is slipping, and the truth, however uncomfortable for those invested in denying it, is breaking through.

      And at this point, I believe there’s no excuse for anyone to be ignorant about what’s happening, especially now, when it’s all crystal clear, unfolding in front of the world in real time.

      Thank you for this discussion : )

5. Hi Maryam,

   Thank you for this insightful and thought-provoking post. I am both grateful for your raw and personal take on this tragedy and devastated that you must write about your own home as such an unjust illustration for the shortcomings of mass media.

   “The messages Palestinians send are live footage of their mass murder, but by the time they reach Western newsrooms, they are twisted into biased reporting that flattens, sanitizes, and outright misrepresents the truth.” This passage in particular made me think about the conflicting capabilities of media. In our classes, we discuss the innovative potential of video, photo, or some technological amalgamation to create art and make an impact. We use fancy tools and wrack our brains for creative forms in an attempt to make our art stand out more than another. The media that we receive from Palestinians is different — it’s live, unedited depictions of their horrifying reality. It’s first-hand evidence, and it holds immense power — so why doesn’t it work?

   You answer this clearly by describing the journey that the message of Palestinian’s take before reaching our eyes. I am reminded of the theories of communication we learned in INFO200, illustrating how the sender must encode their message into a package that gets decoded by the receiver. In this process, the receiver holds power in how they decode the message before presenting it to the public — and this is the power, the ultimate mass media that you highlight. This power is why there are 38 million social media posts we haven’t seen, why Western news reporters speak about the genocide with mild and watered-down vocabulary, and why some people are still able live in ignorance. Although this power is overwhelming, the first step to overcoming it is always awareness. Thank you for this post and the opportunity you provided for me to think deeply about the media I consume or don’t consume.

   1. Your comment really moved me. Thank you for engaging so thoughtfully with what I wrote. You’re so right. In our assignments, we experiment with media forms to make them impactful and creative, while Palestinians’ footage is raw, unmediated evidence of a horrifying reality of injustice. The tragedy is that even this undeniable, unfiltered truth can still be reframed by those in power into propaganda that justifies crimes.

      I really appreciate how you connected this to the sender/receiver model from the INFO course. I completely agree, that framework makes the imbalance of power painfully clear. Palestinians may send the message but Western institutions ultimately control how it’s decoded and represented to the public. And as you said, that decoding is why people can scroll past genocide and still stay silent or willfully ignorant.

      I also really loved your point about awareness being the first step! I see it as a kind of counter-medium. If power distorts the message, awareness works in the opposite direction by refusing distortion. When people deliberately learn, unlearn, witness, question, expose, and share what is being hidden/silenced, they disrupt the flow of propaganda. It doesn’t stop injustice but it resists the silence around it. And that resistance, multiplied through solidarity, is what makes truth break through, no matter what.

      Thank you again for your comment. : )

6. I completely agree with the sentiments expressed in your article. I’ve always believed that, no matter what war, ordinary people are always the ones who suffer. Your words have made me realize once again that when the media and institutions fail to convey the truth, silence only deepens the pain. It’s truly heartbreaking that those who simply want to survive and record reality have become the group paying the highest price in this war. This is especially true for the peacekeeping soldiers who risk their lives to protect one victim after another. These are the people the media should truly promote, not fake news.

   1. Thank you so much, Saber. I really appreciate your words and completely agree, it’s always the ordinary people, the civilians, the journalists, the children, the doctors, the medics, etc., who bear the greatest pain of war and colonial violence. What you said about silence deepening the suffering really resonates with me. When truth is distorted or systemically silenced, the people living through it are attacked twice, once by violence and again by silence. That’s exactly what’s happening in Gaza right now. It’s so horrifying and unacceptable. In what world is this allowed to continue? This is a war on humanity itself. And I think that’s why it’s so important for us to keep speaking, writing, exposing and documenting to make sure their stories aren’t lost, and to remind the world who truly pays the price.

7. Hi Maryam,

   Thank you for honestly describing the stripping of Palestine’s autonomy and voice and your vulnerability for sharing your experience of the atrocities. Your post’s themes overall remind me of Walter Benjamin’s concept of the Cult of Distraction and how if you throw messages at a distracted crowd there will be a development of critics, yet a crowd with no real opinion. I have never seen in real-time such visceral opinions about a topic, in this case a genocide, with such apathetic actions to follow. Your attribution of Peter’s quote in your post that the media are just “playthings of institutions” has never resonated so clearly. Your blog post is truly impactful, and important. Thank you. I just wonder about your answer to the question of if you think the diaspora of information by the increasing accessibility of technology has created a culture of inaction, specifically towards Palestine. It’s easier to yell behind a screen than to be in true solidarity. I felt there was more connectiveness when there were concentrated forms of news that prioritized legitimacy rather than polarization. However, that concentration of news would have never given Palestine a voice, I believe it is a double-edged sword. I look forward to hearing your thoughts!

   1. Bridghet, thank you so much for your incredibly thoughtful comment! : ) You’re absolutely right to bring up Benjamin’s Cult of Distraction, it’s such a fitting lens here. I’ve also been thinking a lot about how the constant influx of media fragments our attention even when what we’re seeing is horrific. It creates a strange dissonance: people see genocide happen in real time, express outrage online (or not even) and then scroll on. That disconnect between visibility and action is one of the most painful contradictions of this moment.

      Your question about whether the widespread accessibility of media has created a culture of inaction, especially towards Palestine, really made me pause. I think… yes and no. The flood of content absolutely desensitizes people. It turns suffering and injustice into something people consume and forget. But at the same time, the digital sphere has become one of the only spaces where Palestinians can be heard especially when mainstream institutions have long silenced, erased, and misrepresented them. Like you said, it really is a double-edged sword. It amplifies Palestinian voices like never before but it also lays bare the terrifying scale of censorship, manipulation, and double standards.

      And with the ongoing genocide and war crimes happening on an unprecedented scale, the urgency of breaking through those narratives, of making people feel and act, has never been greater. What we’re witnessing is not just a war on humanity but a war on truth itself. The more Palestinians document, the harder power works to distort and silence it. And that makes the role of the audience, especially those of us with privilege and access, even more critical.

      I think the problem isn’t just that people are yelling behind screens, it’s that the algorithm rewards yelling more than listening, performance more than praxis. And I agree, there was a time when centralized news felt more “legitimate” but legitimacy itself is complicated when those very institutions have long upheld colonial narratives. So now we have information that’s more accessible but less trusted, more visible but less actionable.

      That’s why I really believe that awareness goes hand in hand with responsibility. Solidarity has to move beyond screens, to protests, boycotts, donations, organizing, speaking up in our classrooms and communities. Especially for those of us in media-related fields, the question should go from “what do we see?” to “what do we choose to do with what we see?”

      Thank you again for raising such an important point. I appreciate this discussion!

8. Your post was really powerful and emotive. I am such a fan of the way you adapted Peters’ mass media theory to the ongoing genocide in Gaza with such lucidity and sense of moral urgency. Your deconstruction of the “message, means, and agents” model and how all three are consistently assaulted in Palestine made Peters’ theory so urgently real and relevant. The section on “power as the ultimate medium” resonated especially with me. You explained how media doesn’t just reflect reality but actually plays a role in determining what the world sees and experiences. The reality that visibility is not the same as accountability really hit me, exposing the ways in which billions are allowed to witness suffering in real time and yet remain frozen by power. Your conclusion wrapped everything up so nicely. The articulation of solidarity and consciousness as a “counter-medium” was one of hope, reminding us that, even in systems of control and censorship, there is always a possibility of resistance and truth to circulate. It is such a powerful call to action for media students like myself to rethink what it means to see and to say.

   1. Thank you so much, Mio, your comment really means a lot! : ) I think you captured exactly what I was trying to get across, that visibility doesn’t automatically lead to accountability. That line between witnessing and acting is where power operates most invisibly. Peters’ framework shows how the media actively shape the representation of reality, controlling who gets seen and who gets silenced based on the power’s agendas. I really appreciate how you picked up on the idea of solidarity and awareness as a counter-medium, because that’s where I find hope too, in the people who refuse to stay silent or “neutral,” and instead turn awareness into resistance.

Comments are closed.