Too often, Vox reporters give the impression they're improvising their way through the news, delivering "facts" that might feel right to the reporter, but aren't actually true. Most recently: Vox claims Palestinian rockets in the days before the 2014 Gaza war were a "response" to Israeli airstrikes.
New York magazine recognized that Hamas gunmen, and those planting explosives, are not "protesters."
Politico uses questionable sources and a false narrative to attack the U.S. Ambassador to Israel and U.S.-Israeli relations.
Journalists keep treating Hamas claims with undue credibility—missing the terror group’s motives and history.
NPR and the New York Times have reported on "rioters" before. So why, when covering crowds of men hurling stones, throwing firebombs, attacking a border fence, setting fire to fields and buildings, and shooting Israelis, does it describe the perpetrators as "protesters"?
The headline previously read, "Israel Kills Dozens of Unarmed Protesters in Gaza as Jared Kushner Speaks of Peace, in Jerusalem."
On Gaza "March of Return" casualties, MSNBC's Chris Hayes discards any semblance of journalistic professionalism and embraces Hamas propaganda. He cites Hamas claims as fact, despite the terror group's history of manipulations.
NYT's David Halbfinger abandons the role of objective news analyst to parrot Hamas propaganda lines attacking Israel, suggesting in his own words that Israelis use "disproportionate" force against innocent demonstrators.
The Post's coverage of the recent rioting in Gaza was among the worst.
From NPR to the New York Times to Reuters and beyond, how did the media fare in covering violence along Gaza's border with Israel?