Tricks the Legacy Media Is Playing On You

The issue of Gaza is not armed resistance; the structural situation is fundamentally one of occupation and dispossession.

Let’s talk media. In the past week, I noticed many people commenting about mainstream media turning fairer in their coverage of Gaza, actually reporting on the suffering of the Palestinians, reporting on Israeli war crimes, and criticizing its actions.

They aren’t. It’s a trick.

I have been researching legacy media extensively, since October—media is my job, and the way they have been working to whitewash Israeli’s war crimes and manufacture consent for this genocide had been the most devastating moment of my adult life. All the media I admired for so long and strived to work for, as my lifelong dream, or goal, as you will—broke my heart. But as I usually quickly pick myself up after every heartbreak, I did at this instance too, but with a mission at heart; research them, be on top of every single thing they publish—and expose them.

Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned?

New York Times scorned me, and I have some fury.

Vengence, if you will.

I need to let you in on it before you go off virtually high-fiving them for finally showing their humanity. It’s all bullshit. They are still propagandists for war and destruction.

These are the three tricks they are playing on you.

Reporting on something we already know about

Two days ago The New York Times posted their video investigation titled—Israel Bombed Areas Where It Ordered Gaza’s Civilians to Go (The Times removed this article/or changed the title, therefore I cannot provide you with a link).

On Dec 24th, they published an article titled—Rights groups call for the investigation of Israel’s mass detentions in Gaza (The Times removed this article/or changed the title, therefore I cannot provide you with a link). Israel rounded people up on Dec 7th. The New York Times decided to report on it 17 days later. When we already know about it. In obligatory passive voice, a directive straight from Tel Aviv, no doubt.

Today, they published an article titled—Israeli Military Admits Fault in 2 Deadly Strikes in Central Gaza. A situation that already happened and we already know about it.

Yesterday, they published an article titled—What Happened in Israel’s Deadliest Attacks in Gaza. Again, something we already saw on our phones.

When respectable, legacy media reports on something we already know about, there’s nothing at stake for the entity they are trying to shield from public scrutiny. We already know this information from social media. This is not journalism, it’s not journalistic reporting—it would be if they actually reported on it, when it actually happened, to inform you. The reason why they’re posting about it now is to create an illusion of covering both sides.

Making both sides in this “conflict” equal (tit for tat)

This trick is very subtle, a masterclass in media manipulation—so nuanced that it's hard to notice unless you have extensive knowledge of world history or are willing to spend hours daily informing yourself.

Pay attention to this.

When mainstream media reports on both sides in the manner of—well, they sent the rocket, and then we launched an airstrike, and then they sent some fireworks, and then we bombed a refugee camp—it makes this “war” appear equal. Mainstream media invites guests on shows in a tit-for-tat format, inviting people on both sides to condemn the actions of the opposite side; will you condemn the Hamas rockets, or will you condemn the Israeli airstrikes—making it seem this “conflict’ is fair in strength, both sides are to blame; leading you, the reader in concluding this circle of violence is too complicated and there’s nothing anyone can do about it.

This is a deliberate editorial process, a well-thought-out tactic for you to forget the context here. And the context here is not tit for tat, the context and the issue here is an illegal military occupation of Palestine.

The media will never report on violence against the Palestinians; they will focus on Hezbollah, and they will focus on Hamas, while entirely ignoring what we’ve just heard about the violence toward the Palestinian people. This journalistic trick is meant for the general public to think this issue is so complicated to think about or ever understand—there’s an ancient hatred in the Middle East and there won’t ever be peace there.

It’s tailored for you, the reader, to believe this is some sort of biblical, religious conflict—an epic civil war between two communities trying to coexist—while completely ignoring that millions of people are living under the mercy, rule, and military occupation of the other population.

This is how legacy media is assisting in upholding Israel’s status quo. To convince you of this circle of violence. Keep the military occupation running. The issue of Palestine does not begin or end with rockets. Living under occupation day in and day out is an issue that only escalated on October 7th, it didn’t start then.

Criticizing Israel 

Pay attention to this one, it’s very subtle—legacy media will criticize Israel but not the main context of the issue, which is what caused the October 7th, and that is the military occupation. They will criticize Israel’s response to October 7th, and question if Israel’s response is “too disproportional”, a trick the likes of Piers Morgan used way too often to fool his pro-Palestinian guests into being perceived as measured and fair. It’s worthless journalism—he never actually states IT IS disproportionate what the Israeli army is doing to the Palestinian people, or ever raised the question of illegal military occupation that created the situation where October 7th can happen. 

Piers, or any other mainstream journalist never condemned Israel’s onslaught on Gaza. They only feign horror and worry for clicks; designed to have the illusion of accountability while helping Israel uphold the status quo (maintaining the military occupation) while keeping the public enraged by seeing dead kids on their screen daily—in check.

Notice the words legacy media never uses while criticizing Israel. Media will never say the word genocide even when the number of victims crosses the threshold of sense or reason, even when the genocidal intent has been heard from the mouths of Israeli government officials, soldiers, and supporters. Media will criticize some particular policy of Israel’s State, but won’t ever discuss the apartheid and the military occupation carried out by the Israeli State.

They won’t print how the structural situation is fundamentally one of occupation and dispossession. All they will say is—Israelis should act with a bit more restraint, or Israelis should be a bit more careful not to bomb civilians.

Be wary of these tactics. Let’s stay vigilant in holding the media accountable and not be swayed when they merely perform the bare minimum of responsible journalism. Media should aim for unbiased reporting, not manipulating the masses to protect their own interests.