Civilian casualty figures from the Israel-Hamas conflict have been exaggerated and manipulated to suggest that Israel is intentionally targeting civilians, according to a new analysis.
The study, released by the UK-based Henry Jackson Society, criticized the media for failing to differentiate between combatants and non-combatants and for relying on inflated statistics provided by Hamas-controlled sources, such as the Gaza Health Ministry.
According to Gaza officials, over 44,700 individuals have died since the October 7 terrorist attacks on Israel. However, this number ignores the reality that at least 17,000 of these were Hamas militants, as highlighted by the report, which cited intelligence from Israeli and U.S. military sources. The omission of this context has often gone unmentioned in news coverage.
The report, titled “Questionable Counting,” accused the Gaza Health Ministry of artificially inflating casualty numbers by including deaths from natural causes and overreporting fatalities among women and children.
The researchers found that names of men were sometimes added to lists of deceased women, and adults were categorized as children in official death tallies.
“This misclassification contributes to the narrative that civilian populations, particularly women and children, bear the brunt of the conflict, potentially influencing sentiment and media coverage,” said Andrew Fox, who authored the report.
Approximately 5,000 natural deaths, including those of cancer patients, were reportedly included in the casualty figures. Some of these individuals were later listed as still undergoing treatment, the study claimed.
Such inaccuracies, the report concluded, have “led to a narrative where the Israel Defense Forces are portrayed as disproportionately targeting civilians.”
The study analyzed news reports published between February and May 2024 that contained Gaza death tolls. It examined content from eight prominent media outlets: CNN, BBC News, The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Guardian, Associated Press, Reuters, and Australia’s ABC.
{Matzav.com Israel}
Curious, the eight mentioned here are all so slanted and are hardly accurate news reporting agencies yet the story calls them prominent! That’s a new definition for the world? Let me check my new 2025 version of the WOKE dictionary.
I suspect it is much worse than this.
You need a whole ‘study’ for something everyone knows?
You need a whole ‘study’ for something everyone knows ?