(JNS) A recent wave of headlines has reinforced the growing narrative that the Israeli military deliberately targets journalists in Gaza. The airstrike last week on Nasser Hospital in Khan Yunis became the latest example, with both Hamas and major international outlets alleging that Israel intentionally killed five journalists in a strike that left 20 civilians dead.

Global condemnation followed swiftly, prompting Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to express regret, calling the incident a “tragic accident.”

The next day, the Israel Defense Forces stated that six of those killed were known Hamas operatives and that the strike targeted a location adjacent to a Hamas surveillance camera being used to track troop movements.

The pattern of critiquing Israel for the deaths of Hamas-affiliated reporters or reporters operating in the immediate vicinity of Hamas terrorists has become a defining feature of international reporting. Headlines and opening paragraphs emphasize the deaths of “journalists,” while references to Hamas links, propaganda roles or the group’s control of local media often appear only in passing, if at all.

Journalist or terrorists?

While the six terror operatives named did not include any of the media operatives who were killed in the attack, multiple “journalists” who were killed on site did have terror affiliations.

Mohammed Salama of Al Jazeera, who was killed at Nasser Hospital, was filmed crossing into Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, holding a Palestinian flag and standing on an Israeli tank holding a belt of machine gun ammunition.

Mariam Abu Daqqa, who was also killed at Nasser Hospital and was claimed by the Associated Press, was an employee who taught “journalism” courses for the Hamas-run Government Media Office.

While the media operatives killed at Nasser hospital were circumstantially linked to terror operations, there are dozens of cases where “journalists” were named by the IDF as active terror operatives or even commanders in Hamas battalions.

Anas al‑Sharif was killed in mid-August and was revealed to be a Hamas cell leader responsible for rocket attacks, posing as a journalist.

Hossam Shabat was targeted by the IDF in March due to his involvement in attacks on Israeli troops near Beit Lahia in northern Gaza, but claimed to be a correspondent, leading to international condemnation.

Ismail al‑Ghoul claimed to be a field reporter and was killed in March, after the IDF revealed that he was a Nukhba operative in Hamas involved in the Oct. 7 attacks.

Ismail Abu Omar wrote for Al‑Jazeera but was shown to be a deputy company commander in a Hamas battalion who participated in the Oct. 7 attacks.

Finally, Hamza Dahdouh, the eldest son of the Al Jazeera bureau chief and a journalist on the Al Jazeera payroll, was killed in a drone strike targeting a vehicle containing journalists in Khan Yunis. The group was filming the aftermath of a previous strike. He died alongside freelance journalist Mustafa Thuraya. The IDF later showed that Thuraya was a Hamas deputy squad commander and explained that Hamza was affiliated with Palestinian Islamic Jihad’s electronic engineering unit and had been a commander in its Zeitoun Battalion. The squad was actively “operating an aircraft that posed a threat to IDF troops” at the time of the strike.

The listed examples are but a narrow representation of a broader phenomenon. Hamas’s political wing controls who is recognized as a journalist in the territory. Press credentials are issued through the group’s Government Media Office, which oversees local outlets.

As a result, many of those described abroad as journalists are simultaneously employed within Hamas’s political or military structures. While reported internationally as members of the press, the majority of individuals included in global casualty tallies fall into the category of Hamas-affiliated operatives rather than independent reporters.

No real journalists

Professor Eytan Gilboa, founder and head of the School of Communications at Bar-Ilan University in Ramat Gan, explained that it is impossible to characterize almost any of the activity going on in Gaza right now as “legitimate journalism.”

“It is not enough to call yourself a journalist and to wear a vest that says ‘press’ on it to be a real journalist,” Gilboa told JNS. “There are no real journalists in Gaza, just like in Russia, China, North Korea or Iran.

“Almost all journalists in Gaza either work for Hamas media or work for Al Jazeera, which is not a legitimate news organization and with many terror ties, or they work for Western media organizations like Reuters or The New York Times, in which case they are deeply censored and only are allowed to report Hamas-approved content,” he said.

“Most often, they are employees of Hamas, doing work for Hamas, meaning they are not journalists but propagandists,” Gilboa added.

The conflation of accredited journalists with local reporters has led to a massive inflation of the number of so-called journalists killed in Gaza.

Since the start of the war, the United Nations has claimed that 242 “journalists” have been killed in Gaza. However, there have been zero cases of foreign accredited journalists killed in Gaza. Every media operative claimed by the UN is either unaccredited or accredited through the Hamas-run Government Media Office. While no statistics exist on the percentage of killed journalists who are known to be terror operatives, there are dozens of publicly known cases.

By contrast, dozens of accredited foreign journalists were killed in Iraq and Syria, and six have been killed so far in Ukraine.

While Western militaries have traditionally attempted to protect legitimate media operations, enemy-affiliated media operatives have often been seen as valid targets.

US and NATO forces recently bombed enemy media infrastructure in Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria and Kosovo. US forces further directly targeted Al-Qaeda, Taliban and ISIS “journalists” who were affiliated with the terror groups’ media operations.

A more dangerous threat

Former Israeli Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon, chairman of the Silver Road Capital financial advisory firm, explained that in his view, propaganda and media operatives, working with Hamas, were taking part in the military hostilities.

“In WWII were Goebbels and the Nazi propaganda machine a legitimate target? Of course they were, and they were even more dangerous than some military targets. Of course, this needs to be handled carefully and professionally, but overall, this could definitely be a threat,” Ayalon told JNS.

Forming the narrative 

According to experts, the careful formation of the “Israel kills Journalists” narrative is not an organic process but the product of a concentrated media operation.

“Hamas is very deliberate and sophisticated in its propaganda war. The same technique that Hamas used to spread the idea of starvation is used to spread the idea that Israel is targeting journalists,” Ayalon said. “Their military is very weak, but they are still very functional in other ways, such as media and propaganda. They are sending out messages, pictures and videos every day; they are very active on social media. That part of Hamas is still functional,” he added.

Gilboa agreed with this assessment, adding that “Hamas has organized a very successful and organized campaign claiming Israel is killing journalists in Gaza because Israel does not want all the horrible things that are happening in Gaza to be reported on.”

Hamas operates a disciplined propaganda machine that functions as an extension of its political and military apparatus. The group controls Al-Aqsa TV and affiliated radio, print and online platforms, alongside dozens of Telegram channels distributing battlefield footage and casualty lists. Media teams embedded with fighters record operations and publish material within hours, often highlighting individuals identified internationally as journalists. Still images, videos and statistics are then amplified by sympathetic outlets and activist networks.

The group also exploits global social media platforms. Videos of combat operations, funerals and civilian casualties are uploaded to TikTok, X and Instagram within minutes, packaged for viral distribution. Messaging apps such as WhatsApp and Telegram further extend circulation through private networks.

Much of this content is reproduced by international media without attribution, granting Hamas narratives a far wider reach. Al Jazeera serves as a key conduit, broadcasting Hamas-sourced material and framing it as frontline reporting. From there, images and figures are picked up by legacy outlets such as the BBC, CNN and Reuters, which often rely on Hamas-credentialed local stringers.

Over time, this system has generated a set of broad narratives that dominate global discussion of the war. These include claims that Israel systematically targets journalists, that Gaza faces imminent famine and that Israeli military operations constitute genocide. Additional themes portray Israel as deliberately striking hospitals, intentionally killing children and targeting civilians at aid distribution sites. Evacuation orders are frequently described as ethnic cleansing or a second “Nakba.”

Each of these macro-narratives originates in Hamas-controlled channels, is amplified by Al Jazeera, and then reinforced by Western coverage, often without independent corroboration.

Israel’s response 

According to experts, Israeli policies restricting journalists’ access to Gaza have increased Hamas’s ability to control media narratives emerging out of the strip. “Israel does not let journalists in because it could put them in harm’s way and might create a logistical issue for the military,” Ayalon explained. “However, as long as there are these restrictions from Israel, it generates suspicion and allows Hamas to feed the international media whatever they want,” he added.

Gilboa said that in his view, this policy was doing more harm than good for Israel’s war effort.

“Israel’s policy of not letting journalists into Gaza is making things more complicated. Israel says it is worried for the journalists’ safety, but it seems to me that it is doing a lot of harm to Israel and that it would be easier to let foreign press in and to have them be responsible for their own safety,” he said.

Since the start of the war, foreign correspondents have been largely barred from entering the Strip independently. Journalists seeking access are required to embed with the Israel Defense Forces under strict conditions, leaving coverage inside Gaza almost entirely in the hands of local reporters credentialed by Hamas. This, among other factors, has led to international outlets relying heavily on Hamas-controlled material, fueling accusations against Israel as casualty figures and accounts originating from Hamas-linked sources circulate widely with little independent verification.

In addition to restricted journalistic access to Gaza, according to experts, Israel’s limited public relations effort has allowed Hamas to seize the initiative in the informational battleground. The Public Diplomacy Ministry, established only months before the war, was shut down in October 2023, with its budget redirected to civilian rehabilitation projects near Gaza.

Responsibility for international messaging has since been split between the Foreign Ministry, the Prime Minister’s Office and the IDF Spokesperson’s Unit, with no central coordinating authority. A National Public Diplomacy Directorate was set up under the Prime Minister’s Office, but it has operated with minimal staff, no permanent director, and reliance on freelance spokespeople.

In 2025, the government approved an unprecedented budget of roughly 545 million shekels ($150 million) for the Foreign Ministry’s public diplomacy efforts, more than 20 times the pre-war allocation, but by midyear, only 60 million shekels had been spent, reflecting bureaucratic delays and weak operational capacity.

Other arms, such as the Israeli Government Advertising Agency (Lapam) have faced mass resignations and stalled recruitment.

The result is a fragmented system in which Hamas communicates daily and in real time, while Israel’s official messaging remains slow, underfunded, and poorly coordinated.

“Israel does not have a streamlined public relations operation. It is all broken up, and right now, we especially need a strong coordinated response,” Ayalon said. “It is very difficult to coordinate a unified media campaign without someone giving directions, making sure everyone is sending out the same message, and setting clear policy.”

There is broad agreement that public diplomacy is one of the crucial theaters of the current war and one in which Israel is performing particularly badly. In that context, the spread of the narrative on Israel targeting the press is but a symptom of a larger issue.

“There is gross negligence by the government in handling this issue. Israel needs to immediately invest in this critical part of the war. We need a strong push both in social media and in legacy media to fight back against the Hamas propaganda,” Ayalon said.

He added that Israel is well-positioned to take the upper hand in this aspect of the war. “We need a clear message, we need more media access and stronger spokesperson teams, and we need a lot more online presence. There is no reason why we should be losing here. We are global technology leaders and should be much stronger than Hamas here,” Ayalon said.

Gilboa said, “Israel has no organized strategy of public diplomacy. There are no offices, no system, no manpower and no resources. The Israeli government has not understood that military campaigns need to happen together with information campaigns. They do not understand that hard power is not enough.”

Want more news from Israel?
Click Here to sign up for our FREE daily email updates