Media Blindness: When Hamas Breaks the Ceasefire and Headlines Blame Israel
The Gaza ceasefire almost collapsed this week. It happened because Hamas killed two Israeli soldiers in an area controlled by the IDF, according to the internationally-backed agreement with the terror group.
In response, Israel retaliated with air strikes on Hamas targets in the enclave.
Yet the media managed to blur the first fact and emphasize the second, portraying Israel as a regional bully breaking a fragile truce.
They did it by using skeptical language — or by omitting Hamas from the story altogether.
Skepticism and Doubt
The first tactic questioned what Hamas actually did. Phrases that made Hamas’ actions look like a mere “accusation” made headlines in The New York Times:
Two Israeli soldiers lie dead & more are seriously injured.
How much evidence does it take before @nytimes stops treating Hamas crimes as more than an “accusation?”
So, NYTimes, stop spitting in the faces of both Israel and your readers and start reporting the facts. pic.twitter.com/OUUaFBRI0m
— HonestReporting (@HonestReporting) October 19, 2025
The BBC was also skeptical — but it went further. The UK broadcaster subtly questioned whether Israeli troops were indeed inside the agreed-upon perimeter, known as “The Yellow Line,” effectively implying the attack might have been justified.
According to @BBCNews, it all started when Israel fired back.
When Hamas breaks the ceasefire and attacks Israelis, guess who the BBC frames as the aggressor.
And the yellow line is the area that multiple countries signed off on — not “what Israel says,” according to the BBC. pic.twitter.com/rJs0hifemm
— HonestReporting (@HonestReporting) October 19, 2025
Sky News even doubted whether the Hamas operatives who killed the two soldiers by firing an RPG directly at them were terrorists. And it relied on Hamas — disguised under the title “The Gaza government media office” — to blame Israel for other violations.
.@SkyNews also doesn’t know what the “Gaza government media office” is that they are relying on for their “news.”
It’s propaganda straight from Hamas, and Sky is happy to broadcast it. https://t.co/fpLd9FM00D
— HonestReporting (@HonestReporting) October 20, 2025
The Times of London did not bother attributing accusations. Its headline simply led with Israel’s strike and called Hamas’ attack “alleged.”
Two dead Israeli soldiers are being buried today. Yet, somehow, they were killed in an “alleged attack” according to @thetimes.
And somehow, the ceasefire is in doubt, not because of the attack that breached it, but Israel’s response.
Make it make sense. pic.twitter.com/2DQKIHY6kc
— HonestReporting (@HonestReporting) October 20, 2025
Omitting Hamas
Meanwhile, Reuters avoided the facts altogether by not mentioning Hamas in its headline — which focused solely on Israel.
And the leading paragraph in the agency’s story described “an attack” without perpetrators:
The Israeli military said on Sunday a ceasefire in Gaza had resumed after an attack killed two of its soldiers and prompted a wave of airstrikes that Palestinians said killed 26 people, in the most serious test yet of this month’s truce.
The Associated Press followed suit, offering no mention of Hamas:
France24 went even further, not only omitting Hamas entirely and blaming Israel, but also adding its own spin — that the Jewish State acted “despite [the] ceasefire agreement.”
The Israeli media reported that Hamas broke the ceasefire by killing two Israeli soldiers in Gaza and that Israel then *retaliated* against Hamas.
Not an “attack on Gaza despite a ceasefire agreement.”
But that would ruin @France24_en‘s skewed anti-Israel narrative. pic.twitter.com/JQtlpdtHG1
— HonestReporting (@HonestReporting) October 20, 2025
This pattern isn’t accidental — it’s systemic. By omitting Hamas or labeling its actions as “alleged,” much of the media shields the terror group from accountability while turning Israel into the perpetual villain.
When Hamas kills Israelis during a ceasefire, it breaks the truce. When Israel responds, it’s defending itself. But in the headlines, that truth is blurred — and readers are misled. Journalism’s role is to clarify, not conceal. When major outlets obscure who fires the first shot, they become complicit in rewriting the story of aggression and victimhood.
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.