AP’s Presence in Jala Towers Calls its Objectivity Into Question

Israel has since provided evidence to the Biden administration confirming their claim, which the administration found satisfactory. Ron Dermer, former Ambassador of Israel to the United States, responded to allegations that the Israeli government’s refusal to publicly disclose evidence of Hamas’ presence in the towers shows that no such evidence exists. “When all of the information gets out,” said Dermer, “people are going to be embarrassed about making such an allegation.”

The complex also housed the local offices of media outlets like the Associated Press and Al Jazeera. The IDF provided ample warning of the attack to those in the building and no media employees were injured. AP President and CEO Gary Pruitt denounced the bombing and called for an explanation from the Israeli government and U.S. State Department.

“The Israeli government says the building contained Hamas military intelligence assets. We have called on the Israeli government to put forward the evidence. AP’s bureau has been in this building for 15 years. We have had no indication Hamas was in the building or active in the building. This is something we actively check to the best of our ability. We would never knowingly put our journalists at risk,” said Pruitt.

The US government seems convinced by Israeli intelligence reports that the AP was operating in the same building as Hamas, meaning it was also paying rent to the organization, which the US and the European Union, among others, classify as a terrorist organization. As such, the AP has been directly funding one side of the conflict to operate out of its property while ostensibly claiming journalistic objectivity in its coverage of the events.

This reality calls into question the independence of the AP, Al Jazeera, and the other media outlets that were operating out of the Jala Towers in their coverage of the conflict. If the Israeli claim about Hamas’ presence in the building is true, it would severely undermine Pruitt’s claim that the AP had no knowledge that one of the two participants in the conflict was operating right under their nose. The AP would then be guilty of willfully concealing this information from the public. That, or their reporters would be either too inept to uncover the AP’s relationship with Hamas or too afraid to reveal it.

Running the AP sub-bureau in Gaza, “which is controlled by Hamas,” said former Jerusalem AP correspondent Matti Friedman, “requires both passive and active cooperation with Hamas.” Since the 2008 Israel-Hamas war, “AP’s coverage from Gaza became a quiet collaboration with Hamas”, said Friedman. “Our coverage shifted accordingly, though we never informed our readers. Hamas military actions were left vague or ignored, while the effects of Israeli actions were reported at length, giving the impression of wanton Israeli aggression, just as Hamas wanted. When a reporter wrote a story about Hamas censorship in the summer of 2014, editors shelved it.  We were trading truth for access and providing an illusion of “coverage” that was actually propaganda – a kind all the more effective because it was not tagged “propaganda” but simply “Gaza City (AP).””

This is not the first time the AP has been accused of compromising its objectivity in its coverage of a genocidal, autocratic regime. It accommodated the Nazis after their rise to power and obeyed direct orders from the Hitler regime until it became a key channel for German propaganda in the 1930s. Likewise, in Gaza, it is in danger of becoming merely an extension of Hamas’ propaganda department, covering up the crimes of the terrorist organization and disseminating its lies to unsuspecting readers under the guise of objective reporting.

By Oleg Ivanov