The Press Ombudsman has decided not to uphold a complaint by Ms Edel Cox about three articles published in The Irish Times in late October 2024. These are news reports from the Reuters agency about the Israel-Palestine war, and Israel’s attacks on Lebanon. Ms Cox complained that what had elsewhere been recorded and documented in Gaza “in the last few days” had not been accurately or truthfully reported by The Irish Times and therefore breached the Code of Practice.
She complained that the omission of reports and images was “purposeful” and that the reports did not reflect the “horror and devastation” caused by the Israeli army. She said that the term “ethnic cleansing” should be used in respect of what was taking place in north Gaza. She said the figures given as the number of Israelis killed by Hamas on 7 October 2023 and the number of Palestinians killed by Israeli forces in Gaza were inaccurate and misleading.
The Irish Times responded that while the complainant was “entitled to her opinion on editorial choices” nothing in her complaint “even comes close to being a breach of the Code”. It noted that a video which accompanied one of the pieces showed “harrowing” footage of Gaza residents moving bodies after an Israeli airstrike on a residential building, as well as reporting on Palestinian fears that Israel “intended to clear them from northern Gaza”. It noted that the article also stated that “the Israeli offensive” had “made most of Gaza’s 2.3 million people homeless, caused widespread hunger and destroyed hospitals and schools”.
The publication noted that another of the pieces referred to the death toll from an Israeli airstrike on a residential building, and another that northern Gaza had been “bombed to rubble” by Israel. It noted that it had published hundreds of articles about the horrific impact of violence on the people of Gaza.
Decision
The Press Ombudsman notes that the three articles about which the complaint under Principle 1 (Truth and Accuracy) has been made, are all news reports, and therefore include the perspectives of various parties. She finds that the articles, as asserted by the publication, contain many examples of the suffering caused to the Gazan people by Israeli violence, and that the scale of this violence is by no means understated. She finds that while the publication does not use some of the language which the complainant considers necessary, this is a matter for the editor, and she finds no evidence of any attempt to mislead. The publication, for example, does not refer to “ethnic cleansing” but it does refer to fears among Palestinians that the intention of Israel is “to clear them from northern Gaza.”.
War reporting forces the press to make decisions on a daily basis about which violent atrocities should be highlighted, meaning that others may get less attention. It requires the press to attempt to discern patterns and phases in the midst of chaotic, dangerous and rapidly changing situations. It is rarely possible to estimate with any degree of accuracy the numbers of people displaced, injured or killed. The Press Ombudsman finds that the reports which are the subject of this complaint reflect a responsible approach to news reporting which is in compliance with the Code of Practice’s requirement to strive for truth and accuracy. She finds that there is no breach of Principle 1 of the Code.
13 February 2025