The Media Accountability Project  

"Corroborative statements from multiple reputed international bodies also lend legitimacy to the narrative that Palestinians living in the West Bank are victims of a brutal, decades-long military occupation. For this reason, it was inappropriate to include the claim that “Israel ensures that humanitarian assistance is provided and does not apply any limitation on access for medical staff” in your article, when it has been shown that not only is the Israeli military failing to ensure the provision of such assistance, but is instead actively hampering its delivery."

"When mentioning the Jenin refugee camp, we must remember that it is exactly that; a “refugee camp”. The people living there are refugees who have been displaced from their homes and have been under periodic attacks by the Israeli military. The “militants” you mentioned are actually refugees defending themselves from the Israeli military invasions which have indiscriminately targeted men, women and children."

"As such, I strongly urge Reuters to be far more critical of the Israeli government and military sources when reporting on developments in Israel-Palestine. The quotes by Gallant and Herzi-Halevi are highly contradictory to statements made by other Israeli officials, most notably Minister of National Security Itamar Ben-Gvir, who is a staunch supporter for the expulsion, and ethnic cleansing of Palestinians from their homes."

It is insufficient to state that the Palestinians “seek” to establish an independent state in the West Bank; this is occupied land which they “claim” as an integral part of any future state.

"I would urge Reuters to be far more skeptical of Israeli military sources when it reports on developments related to Israel-Palestine. There has been well-documented evidence by journalists and Israeli human rights organizations such as B’Tselem and Yesh Din that the Israeli military is complicit in attacks by Jewish-Israeli settlers."

This statement downplays and misrepresents the rule of law and consensus among the international community which recognizes the establishment of Jewish-Israeli settlements as a violation of international law.

"The second part of your sentence is untrue. While its 1988 Charter vowed to work outside the framework of peace initiatives with Israel, since 2004 Hamas leaders have repeatedly and consistently stated they would accept a peace agreement based on Israeli withdrawal to the 1967 borders. Such an agreement would effectively mean accepting a negotiated peace and a de facto recognition of Israel."

"In the opening paragraph, you describe the murder of 19-year-old Faris Hashash, referring to him there only as a “passerby.” I find it alarming that he would not be described simply as a “civilian.” As you are aware, attacks against civilians carry serious implications in international law. Your article serves to obscure this fact by using the term “passerby.” Further, it is unfortunate to notice that the Israeli vehicle that was shot at in the West Bank around the same time was qualified as a “civilian vehicle.” Why isn’t Hashash qualified as a civilian, but an Israeli car is?"

"The descriptions of both Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) are too limited. Rather than relying on catch-all terms like “Islamist” or simply “Iranian-backed,” we encourage journalists to transparently cite the stated aims of these groups."

By referring to Palestinian citizens of Israel as “Israel’s Arab minority,” you downplay the Palestinian identity of the vast majority of the members of their group and their connection with the land, suggesting that they are indistinguishable from Arabs elsewhere in the Middle East and North Africa.