When it comes to reporting the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, words don’t just matter – they mean everything

From deciding where to start your story, to grammar that could be construed as biased, every single word, phrase and timeline has to be checked over and over

The fact that words matter, seems like a laughably obvious thing to say in the context of journalism. But I would venture that this pedestrian adage applies more to coverage of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict than any other in the world.

Reporting from here means covering one of the most fraught stories of our time.

It really pushes reporters and their editors to think about the values we cling to: truth, objectivity, sensitivity.

And this is saying a lot. The Middle East is among the trickiest regions for reporters to navigate, and I write that as someone who was arrested and deported from Egypt last year.

But the growing polarisation within the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and the intense interest and often involvement of foreign countries has piled on the pressure.

And so every word matters. Not just the choice of words, but the positioning of those words, the number of those words.

There are even fierce debates about grammar. I have been asked countless times by Palestinians why western publications insist on writing in the passive.

They ask, why is it “Palestinians were killed” or died, not “Israeli soldiers shot [x] dead”? They question the topography, why is the Palestinian death toll three pars down?

From the Israeli side, there are a slew of organisations dedicated to scouring English language media for alleged bias against Israel.

Apart from pointed queries over choice of words, like “militant” versus “terrorist”, “protest” versus “riot”, a lot of criticism hinges on time frames.

Take an escalation of cross-border fire between Gaza and Israel – where do you start your story?

Was it that Israeli airstrike which initiated the fighting? Or the barrage of rockets an hour before that prompted a retaliatory sortie? Or did it begin earlier in the day when Israeli soldiers took out two militants?

Or do you cycle back even before that, when Israeli soldiers themselves came under fire from Gaza fighters because, the day before, the Israeli army had shot dead protesters?

Every single word, phrase and unit of grammar has to be checked and checked and checked. And even then, truth is tied to narratives, and so there is always room for debate.

Yours,

Bel Trew​

Middle East correspondent