Israeli police work at the site of a suspected shooting attack in Tel Aviv, Israel August 5, 2023. REUTERS/Nir Elias

Reading the reams of news coverage about Israel, it is clear there is something akin to a “Palestinian exception” when it comes to reporting on the Israel-Palestinian conflict.

The Palestinian exception could be broadly defined as a tendency by news organizations to treat Palestinians as unique when compared to their coverage of other issues.

Most recently, the exception can be observed in several reports about Israel’s successful counter-terrorism sting on Sunday, which saw Israeli security forces swoop in on a vehicle carrying three terrorists who were armed and on their way to carry out a shooting attack against Israeli civilians.

The men, who had set out from the terror stronghold West Bank city of Jenin, were later identified as Naif Abu Suias, the head of a terror cell who was being directed by terrorists in the Gaza Strip, Lu’ayy Abu Na’asa, and Baraa Ahmed Qurum. All three men were connected to Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ).

170. Loay Abu Naasa
171. Nayef Abu Sweis
172. Bara Al-Qerm
Islamic Jihad pic.twitter.com/9uouVgFSRM

— Adin – עדין (@AdinHaykin1) August 7, 2023

Despite information about the operation available from the outset — that the men were prevented from carrying out an imminent attack and that they were all confirmed terrorists — several international media outlets sought to reframe the entire incident, by recasting Palestinian terrorists as victims of Israeli aggression. This is an example of the “Palestinian exception” in the media’s coverage of Israel.

The BBC led the way with a piece that was headlined, “Israeli security forces kill three Palestinians in West Bank,” which only mentions the fact that the men were “militants” in the main body of the story.

While the BBC later amended its headline following a tweet from HonestReporting, it still presented the terror backgrounds of the dead Palestinians as mere Israeli claims — “Israel says its forces killed three Palestinian militants in West Bank” — as opposed to incontrovertible fact.

No, @BBCWorld, Israel didn’t just go out and randomly shoot three ordinary Palestinians as your headline implies.

The three were active members of a terrorist cell identified on their way to carry out an attack. https://t.co/y5PX62NvBW pic.twitter.com/hRI7HQP5Su

— HonestReporting (@HonestReporting) August 7, 2023

Similarly, The Times of London opted to use scare quotes around “Palestinian militants” in its headline, which served to cast doubt on Israel’s version of the events.

In addition, the entire piece was filled with language that questioned whether the men had been armed and dangerous, including by failing to mention that at least one of the men had been claimed by PIJ and that there is photographic evidence of the seized firearm.

CNN also failed with both its headline and opening paragraph:

The story itself opened with:

Three Palestinians have been killed by the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) at the Jenin Camp in the occupied West Bank, the IDF announced on Sunday.

The IDF did not announce that it had simply killed three Palestinians. It specifically stated that the three were terrorists, something glaringly omitted by CNN.

Not only that, but the IDF hyperlink in the opening sentence goes straight to a CNN story about the death of Shireen Abu Akleh — not a general page about Israel’s army. It’s almost as if the writer is doing his or her utmost to push the reader in a certain direction.

So maybe it’s not surprising that later in the same story, CNN actually amplified the message of Hamas, a designated terrorist organization, by paraphrasing its spokesman Hazem Qassem’s threats that the “Zionist enemy” will receive retribution in a way that made it seem like CNN had adopted Hamas’ terminology.

In response to HonestReporting calling out the lack of clarity, CNN responded to say that it had reviewed the piece and is “comfortable that the attribution is clear.” This, despite readers reporting otherwise.

The Palestinian exception is also evident in pieces by news organizations that go to great lengths to blur the line between aggressor and victim.

For example, in its report of the Tel Aviv terror attack on Saturday — in which a Palestinian gunman murdered an Israeli city inspector —  ABC News Australia reported the attack thus: “Palestinian man killed in Tel Aviv shooting that leaves another critically injured.”

And as for the headline on the main @abcnews world news page?

There are no words. pic.twitter.com/5C0PaMJKdO

— HonestReporting (@HonestReporting) August 6, 2023

If a terrorist had murdered a citizen of any country besides Israel, it’s hard to believe this story wouldn’t be reported differently, making it clear that the “man” who was killed was a terrorist. This headline makes it seem like the man was an ordinary civilian killed by Israel for no reason, or worse, a malevolent one.

The author is a contributor to HonestReporting, a Jerusalem-based media watchdog with a focus on antisemitism and anti-Israel bias — where a version of this article first appeared.