Al-Jazeera: Hamas’ favorite network
When reporting about the war between Israel and Hamas, several media have chosen to highlight different aspects of the war. Yet, at the end of the day, we can expect that all will adhere to basic journalistic standards, a degree of professionalism. While some media tend to be more critical of Israel, al-Jazeera is truly in a league of its own. Contrary to what the network claims, I would argue that balanced reporting is not its priority. In al-Jazeera’s case, the balance shifted in Hamas’ favor a long time ago.
First encounters with “The Island”
The name al-Jazeera translates as “The Island.” I had first noticed its English channel, which was offered by all cable providers in the Netherlands. But during the Israel-Hamas war of 2014, I managed to get access to the real deal: al-Jazeera Arabic. I was still in college and visiting London during the summer, while the war between Hamas and Israel had erupted. Oxford Street was the weekly venue for massive pro-Palestinian protests and the hotel where I was staying carried the channel in Arabic. Granted, I do not speak Arabic, but it was not necessary. I watched the channel out of curiosity on several occasions and it was quite clear what the angle was. Each newscast was preceded by bombastic music, pictures of crying Palestinians, and an ominous close-up of an Israeli F-16 fighter jet. Now, Western media offered much coverage of the war as well, but al-Jazeera wishes to prioritize Middle Eastern events and voices. However, while the war in Gaza was developing, the Syrian civil war had been raging for more than two years and Islamic State was on the rise. Yet, every time I watched, surely 90 percent of the broadcast was devoted to Gaza. An interesting editorial choice. These encounters alone, gave me the idea that al-Jazeera was not as committed to balanced reporting, as it claimed to be.
Years of close ties with Hamas
As of this writing, al-Jazeera is being scrutinized more and more. During the current war between Israel and Hamas, critics have pointed towards its favoring of Hamas. From broadcasting its carefully orchestrated releases of Israeli hostages to offering a platform for Hamas spokespersons who are not challenged critically. Accusations of bias are vehemently denied by the channel, which argues that it wishes to counter biased Western narratives and claims to uphold the highest standards of journalism. Granted, Hezbollah’s mouthpiece al-Manar does not mince words. As Matthew Levitt described in his book Hezbollah: the Global Footprint of Lebanon’s Party of God, al-Manar simply states that it is the voice of the “resistance.” Levitt continues by quoting a PR director, who once stated that al-Manar was not interested in getting closer to Ariel Sharon to know his opinion. It wanted to get closer, so it could kill him. That is brutally honest. Al-Jazeera, however, claims that it wants to provide a Palestinian perspective. I would argue that “Palestinian” needs to be swapped for “Hamas.”
I have mentioned my own personal experience with al-Jazeera in 2014 and, indeed, already then several other examples showed that it was giving Hamas a free pass. Take for instance its anchor Ghada Oueiss. On her program, she would interview Israeli politicians and the IDF spokesman. Rather revolutionary for a Middle Eastern channel to offer Israelis the opportunity to explain themselves. However, Ghada was clearly determined to vilify the Israelis she had on her show. A similar pattern was used in each interview. Ghada would ask a question and when her Israeli guest tried to answer she would continuously interrupt him – a clever tactic. She used it when interviewing Israeli diplomat Ofir Gendelman and Avi Dichter in 2014. Now, it is a journalist’s job to ask critical questions when interviewing a guest, but Oueiss took it a little further and clearly displayed a pro-Hamas bias. In addition, Oueiss and several other al-Jazeera journalists took to social media and used harsh language to denounce Israel, but also Egypt, the UAE – called by several of them “Arab Zionists” – and even the Palestinian Authority. No criticism of Hamas. These examples from 2014 alone show that al-Jazeera was not offering a Palestinian perspective, nay it was unabashedly supporting Hamas.
To supposedly commit to balanced reporting, al-Jazeera did and does invite guests who are critical of Hamas, though. For instance, in August 2014 Egyptian-American Magdi Khalil, a staunch Hamas critic, was invited to debate Palestinian activist Ibrahim Hamami on a progam through a video connection. The excerpts show that Khalil was allowed to present his arguments uninterrupted, mostly. However, at the end something curious happened. Hamami looked at the anchor and said that “backstabbers” like Khalil needed to be eliminated, a clear threat. Now, the anchor should have reprimanded Hamami at this point, but he did not. The devil is in the details.
There are more examples, but in the current war between Israel and Hamas, al-Jazeera anchors have not just shown their pro-Hamas bias on personal social media accounts. On the contrary, on al-Jazeera itself several incidents have taken place where pro-Hamas views have been expressed by anchors and reporters on air. Take, for instance, Mostafa Ashoor when he squabbled with an Egyptian caller on his program in November 2023. In the clip, Ashoor claims that the caller can say whatever he wants and that he simply moderates the debate. But nothing could be further from the truth, once the caller started criticizing Hamas. To be fair, the caller also criticized Israel, but criticism of Hamas is something that Ashoor would not stand for. Once this happened, Ashoor no longer moderated, but started to debate the caller. More than once, Ashoor called the resistance – i.e. Hamas – “honorable.” He concluded by cutting off the caller and saying that the latter should be ashamed of himself for criticizing the honorable resistance. Moreover, reporters in Gaza have exhibited the same bias on several occasions. In the same month, an often referred to clip shows an al-Jazeera reporter interviewing an elderly Gazan man at a Gazan hospital, who stated that Israel bombed an entire compound of numerous houses, calling it a criminal act. However, when the man continued to condemn Hamas for hiding among civilians, the reporter cut him off and walked away. A month later, something similar happened when an al-Jazeera reporter interviewed another Gazan man. The man talked about a massacre of civilians and said that children were among the dead. The reporter let him talk, but when the man all of a sudden expressed the hope that Allah would punish Qatar and Türkiye – well-known supporters of the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas – the reporter pushed the man away. And just a few days ago, another al-Jazeera reporter interviewed a man in Khan Yunis. When the man tells her that the situation is horrible, she wishes him the best and walks way as he is trying to talk to her. Now, I believe this is the similar pattern: she moves away, because he might criticize Hamas for the horrible situation. So, if al-Jazeera claims to be independent and pursuing balanced reporting, then why can its anchors and reporters not handle criticism of Hamas or Qatar?
Palestinian terror groups continuously thank al-Jazeera for its support
Hamas has repeatedly expressed its appreciation for al-Jazeera. In 2021, Khalil al-Hayya presented al-Jazeera with an award, arguing that the network had demonstrated its support for the Palestinian cause and exhibited a high level of nationalism in its coverage of Gaza. In that same year, Yahya Sinwar expressed his gratitude for al-Jazeera calling it the best pulpit for the Palestinian cause and hailing its journalists, whom he referred to as “fedayeen.” Immediately after this praise he scorned Arab media who were peddling the enemy narrative – meaning Arab journalists who dared to criticize Hamas. By saying this, Sinwar showed that he did not value al-Jazeera for its support of the Palestinians. No, he meant that al-Jazeera supports Hamas. Indeed, by now Palestinian Islamic Jihad is showering al-Jazeera with praise as well. After the conclusion of the current ceasefire agreement, PIJ’s spokesman Abu Hamza praised many, but al-Jazeera in particular for its support. Now, if the channel claims to be balanced and independent, it is quite clear that these Palestinian terror groups have interpreted that statement very differently.
Support for Hamas: not the only example of biased reporting
Critics have accused al-Jazeera of being the representative of Qatar’s foreign policy. While al-Jazeera stresses that its main office is based in Qatar and that it is a private company, it should not be forgotten that it was founded by the previous Emir of Qatar, Hamad bin Khalifa al-Thani. And history shows that al-Jazeera’s reporting has aligned with Qatari policy on more than one occasion. This has been argued by Christopher Phillips in his book The Battle for Syria: International Rivalry in the New Middle East. First of all, he argues that Qatar started promoting an anti-Western agenda through al-Jazeera, since the late 2000s. Secondly, its reporting during the Arab Spring showed some conspicuous gaps that aligned perfectly with Qatari foreign policy. While al-Jazeera broadcast extensively about developments in Tahrir Square in Cairo, the network offered no coverage of Saudi and UAE intervention in Bahrain to help suppress protests against its rulers in March, 2011 – back then, relations between Qatar and Saudi Arabia were still strong and the former endorsed the latter’s invasion of its neighbor. And when protests started in Syria, it took al-Jazeera nearly two weeks, before it started covering events – the Assad regime and the tiny Gulf state enjoyed close ties. However, when Qatar became a staunch critic of the Assad regime within a few months, al-Jazeera abandoned its cautious attitude and started covering the developments in Syria closely. But, Phillips also mentions a Syrian defector, who claimed that then-Emir Hamad offered to reverse al-Jazeera’s critical stance, if Assad was willing to implement reforms – at this point, Qatar still believed that Assad could remain in power. The network’s alignment with Qatar’s regional policy and changing tone even prompted a wave of resignations in 2011. Thus, al-Jazeera’s argued independent journalism is questionable at best and has been for years.
Al-Jazeera: Hamas and Qatar’s platform
Because of these various examples I would argue that al-Jazeera offers a platform. Hamas clearly values the network for this reason, as it is extremely pleased with its coverage. Moreover, offering Hamas a platform earns the approval of Qatar’s ruling family. For example, Sheikha Moza – the current Emir’s mother – took to social media to eulogize Yahya Sinwar, after he had been eliminated by the IDF. In her post she praised the man responsible for October 7th and ominously warned that while he lived on, “they” – Israel – would be gone. Therefore, I would argue that al-Jazeera is closer to the likes of al-Manar, than it wishes to pretend.
When it comes to “The Island,” Mark Twain’s quote seems rather apt: “If you don’t read the newspaper, you’re uninformed. If you read the newspaper, you’re misinformed.”