Decolonizing the Framework of a Genocide

After the events of Oct 7th, 2023, and the response that followed, the slow and painful ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians in Gaza left a deep wound in the classrooms I sat in the mosques I prayed in. In one of the classroom discussions of a course called, Arab Political Uprisings, I distinctly remember the pin-drop silence we sat in mourning the loss of thousands. I recalled moments of the previous years, especially during the holy month of Ramadan, when the Israeli soldiers would raid and attack the Al-Aqsa mosque, and sentiments of grief would take over. However, it was a comment made by a fellow student that stuck with me, 

“Palestinians are not allowed to grieve. We are made to defend our hurt. We are killed and then asked why we should be treated with dignity.” 

This particular point holds great truth and represents reality, but it is also an outcome of the stereotypical framework pushed by mainstream Western media regarding the humanity of Palestinians. According to Erving Goffman (1974), framing theory has prominently influenced journalistic storytelling. In this theory, frames are abstractions that structure meaning and influence perceptions among the audience. These frames can present themselves as “themes, motifs, and stereotypes” that journalists use to cover day-to-day news (Angelo, 2018). This essay aims to highlight how the intentional frameworks of Palestinians and Gaza’s genocide have contributed to promoting Western propaganda legitimizing Israel's occupation while dehumanizing and stereotyping the Arab Muslims.

Setting up the Picture Perfect Stereotype

Schusdson (2011) writes, “To acknowledge that news stories frame reality is also to acknowledge that it would be humanly impossible to avoid framing.”

According to Silke Schmidt (2014), the most crucial event that paved the way for the West to paint Arabs as “aggressors” was the Arab-Israeli War of 1967. Arabs found themselves in an Orientalist framing that depicted them as “backward” and “violent” (Schmidt, 2014). These frameworks have been perpetuated by advanced technology and increased use of social media. After 9/11, the frame shifted from “aggressors” to “terrorists” as President Bush declared War on Terror. Within this framework, the Western narrative associates Islam as the main reason for “aggression, and brutality, fanaticism, irrationality” as well as “medieval backwardness” (Schmidt, 2014). Jack Shaheen’s (2003) Reel Bad Arabs is an analysis of depictions of Arab characters in Hollywood and it is a clear representation of how the demonization of Arabs has been used as an agenda-setting tool to instill stereotypes in the minds of a global audience. 

The most commonly used frame to stereotype Arabs is through gender. The Arab woman is “veiled” and in need of rescuing from the oppression of patriarchy and religious men. Maya Mikdashi (2017) identifies the selective use of gender frames as a tactic to discuss the rise of Islamism and the dangers attached to it.  

To put this in a visual perspective, the example of Iron Man (2008) represents the framework of Arabs. Hollywood, if anything, is a representative of U.S. foreign policy which the movie successfully highlighted as the protagonist of the film was kidnapped by an Islamist group in Afghanistan,Yo and the Arabs were presented as villains while the savior's job relied on the white man. In the sequel of the movie, Iron Man’s friend is seen to be saving Muslim women working in sweatshops and the dialogue goes, “You are free now.” The villainization of Arabs in Hollywood is a result of how news frameworks can dominate mainstream media and translate themselves as common stereotypes in digital spaces and entertainment. 

Discrediting the Palestinians: Either condemn Hamas or Become The Threat Yourself

After seven months of horrific continuous attacks on Gaza by Israel, Western media has shaped the Genocide as a ‘conflict between Hamas and Israel’ and journalists have continued to paint Palestinians in the same frame that perpetuates damaging stereotypes against Arabs and Muslims. 

The most common example is seen in Western mainstream talk shows that feature the Palestinian Ambassador to the United Kingdom, Husam Zumlot who has been repeatedly asked one question, “Do you condemn Hamas?” This is a question that was directed at Palestinian authorities and activists who were given a platform or asked to be interviewed on Western talk shows. This framing is strategic in the sense that it continuously questioned and highlighted Hamas’ attacks on October 7th, all while overlooking Israel’s destruction that followed. 

BBC Newsnight hosted by Kirsty Walk interviewed Ambassador Zumlot on Oct 10th, day 4 of the war with the death toll of Palestinians killed reaching 1000. During the interview, Zumlot mourned his loss as members of his family had been killed by Israeli airstrikes. “They were just sitting at their home and they were simply bombarded. Their entire building was brought down,” said Zumlot (BBC Newsnight, 2023). Surely without any hesitation, the journalist offers a formal condolence and asks, “...can I just be clear though, you cannot condone the killing of Israelis, or can you?” (BBC Newsnight, 2023). The framework that has been created for Arabs and Muslims is one where the West deems them to be guilty without even a fair trial. Al Jazeera journalist, Sana Saeed breaks down this rationale by stating that the interrogation of Palestinians to condemn the violence committed on Israeli civilians has an underlying message that asks people like Zumot to “qualify their humanity” (AJ+, 2023). 

This is a similar sentiment to the one my classmate made and through this framing, the justification of killing Palestinians is understood as a necessary evil committed to defend a nation’s security. Although this rhetoric is a specific tool used against Arabs and Muslims in the media for decades, it is now becoming increasingly difficult for Western journalists and media conglomerates to continue with such patterns due to a digital pushback from a community made up by activists, influencers, citizen journalists, and private users of social media. 

This particular clip was shared across social media platforms almost immediately with a viewership of 13.1 million, 2.5k comments, and 10k retweets on X (formerly known as Twitter). Most comments mocked the journalist’s integrity and the display of double standards in the interview was visibly exposed to the audience. 

The Problematic Coverage of Al-Ahli Hospital 

On Oct 17th, 2023, Israel’s airstrikes attacked Al-Ahli hospital in Gaza and the death toll of Palestinians massacred reached 3000. This came after BBC News ran multiple reports of the existence of Hamas tunnels under hospitals and schools. After the horrific massacre at the hospital, it was the first time Israelis were being blamed on the media, due to the wide-scale videos being shared all across social media by journalists in Gaza. Professor Mohammed Elmasry (2023) broke down Israel's “post-atrocity routine” to either be of denial, claims to have “solid evidence that Palestinians committed the crime,” or when proven guilty, “accepts responsibility but by that time, the world has already moved on.” While the media went on a goose chase to play pin the blame, Israel’s attacks on Palestinians continued. This is a distraction tool used to frame the genocide away from reality. Saeed (2023) sees this to be diminishing the legitimate concerns and critiques of Israeli war crimes. “By spending time on questions of condemnations only ever reserved for one group of one people, Israeli war crimes against a besieged population become a secondary concern and worst, a necessity” (AJ+, 2023). The Al-Ahli attacks did something else – it changed the tone used in Western news media dramatically. 

The New York Times is known for its discrimination against Palestinians and misleading the facts, but the framing shifted that day and a phrase was born, “Hamas-run Gaza Health Ministry”

On October 7th, the article read, “The Palestinian Health Ministry in Gaza said that 198 Palestinians have been killed, and 1610 have been wounded.” However, on October 20th, NYT published an article with a unique linguistic phrase, “the Hamas-operated Gaza Health Ministry.” 

This tactic was employed by the Guardian as well on October 18th in an article that attempted to explain the events of the attack by stating, “The Gaza health ministry, run by Hamas, has blamed Israel for an airstrike.” 

Linguistic choices are not accidental, but rather an effective framing device. A recent report by sociologist Dr. Randa Abdel Fattah found that emotive language for Israeli victims in mainstream news media was used 11 times more than describing Palestinian victims (Hassan, 2024). Although implicit, phrases such as Palestinians are dead, but Israelis are killed have certain connotations of sympathy through selective framing. According to a report by The Intercept specific words are reserved for Israelis that legitimize the occupier’s occupation. “Statistics showed that the term "massacre" was used in a 125-to-2 ratio for Israelis, "slaughter" in 60-to-1, and "horrific" in 36-to-4” (Alyali, 2024). Additionally, terms such as ‘war’ and ‘conflict’ used to describe the last four months are also an intentional framework as it imply an “equally aggressive conflict” rather than seeing it as what it is – genocide.  

Capturing frames and reconstructing narratives:

There are many reasons why the horrific attacks against Palestinians in the last four months have sparked an international outrage compared to the previous years, the vast scale of destruction being an important one. However, it was also due to journalists on the ground such as Motaz Aziza, Bisan, and Wael Al-Dahdou who used social media to report on ground realities. They slowly rose to fame as their followers increased and one of the reasons was their unfiltered testimonies. Aziza went from 25,000 followers to 13 million followers after the attacks in Gaza began. A photography account turned into a page documenting real-life genocide taking place, Aziza would take his camera at the crime scene, and often in his videos, his breakdowns and hopelessness were expressed. Although this does not follow the traditional norms of objectivity, stories such as the ones shared by Gazan journalists have been essential in pushing back stereotypical narratives that have existed in mainstream media.