Over the last month and a half, my feed has been filled with information regarding the Israel-Hamas war and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. With 4.95 billion people, or 61.4% of the world’s population, connected via social media, the digital age has transformed the dissemination and consumption of news (Petrosyan, 2023). Through social media, information can be shared, discussed, and misinterpreted at unprecedented speeds. As the ongoing Israel-Hamas war unfolds in real time on our screens, it can be difficult to navigate the overwhelming amount of information, biases, and misinformation presented to us. It is vital that as you view what is on your screen, you are aware of how to navigate through it to find the truth.
Confirmation Bias
Confirmation bias is the tendency to interpret new evidence in a way that confirms one’s existing beliefs or theories. Social media algorithms greatly amplify this bias by catering towards your likes and friends’ posts in a way that aligns with your preexisting beliefs. This contributes to the spread of misinformation, since users tend to trust content shared by friends. By selecting information that suits your already established beliefs, the algorithms for social media sites shift to show you what you want to see (Luca Ciampaglia & Menczer, 2018).
While social media allows individuals to receive news at a faster rate, it also has become a source of misinformation, disinformation, and fake news. Misinformation is unintentionally false information, while disinformation is deliberately false or biased information with the intent to mislead readers. To navigate through this, you need to be skeptical and question the accuracy of content that you come across, while also seeking multiple perspectives rather than automatically accepting what you initially see as truth.
Difference in Perspectives
As the war between Hamas and Israel continues, thoughts about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict have also arisen. Often, Israel’s supporters complain of bias towards Palestinians, while Palestinian supporters complain of bias towards Israelis. Why is this? The hostile media phenomenon helps explain why this is the case. This phenomenon is a process in which supporters and opponents of an issue perceive the identical coverage to be biased against their own views. Two studies related to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict by Matthes et al. provided evidence of the hostile media phenomenon with a focus on visuals. Participants were shown two completely balanced pictures. However, bias was still perceived. The first study showed that Palestine’s supporters perceived a balanced photo series as biased toward Israel, irrespective of the series’ reach, and vice versa. This effect was also visible for clearly biased pro-Israel and pro-Palestine pictures. The second study replicated those findings (Matthes et al., 2021). It’s important to note that the bias is present for not only pictures deemed neutral, but also in those with a definite bias. Throughout the duration of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the media has been repeatedly accused of either excessively or insufficiently reflecting the perspective of both sides.
This raises concerns over biases presented in the media and lack of individual awareness about the media they’re consuming. Everyone has a different perspective, so this can affect how information is communicated both intentionally and unintentionally. In the context of news sources, the media bias chart gives viewers an idea of the skew and credibility of various publications and news channels. Certain channels, publications, and individuals are known for having a certain bias, and it’s important to be aware of their potential bias and indicators of bias.
Indicators of Bias
- Context is especially important when it comes to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict because it has been going on for many decades. However, there are occasions where events are reported without including context behind the event. For example, one may perceive an attack resulting from building tensions and previous events by Israel as an uncalled for attack by Israel.
- Coverage of selective events can make one group look more favorable. What is not said or covered can make as much of an impact as what is.
- Framing is presenting a message in a way that influences others’ understanding. One example of this might be using the term “occupied territories” instead of “disputed territories.” The terms have different connotations and perspectives, which can affect how the situation is viewed.
- Word choices matter, since words carry connotations with them. Changing a single word can change the meaning of a whole sentence.
Navigating
In the digital age, where information is available instantly and in large quantities, it’s crucial to know how to navigate through the overwhelming amount of content on social media. You need to be aware of confirmation bias, question the accuracy of information, and seek diverse perspectives. Search for indicators of bias in sources, such as context, coverage, framing, and word choices. By critically evaluating the information you consume, you can build a more informed understanding about complex geopolitical issues like the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
References
Luca Ciampaglia, G., & Menczer, F. (2018, June 21). Biases Make People Vulnerable to Misinformation Spread by Social Media. Retrieved December 17, 2020, from https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/biases-make-people-vulnerable-to-misinformation-spread-by-social-media/
Matthes, J., Schmuck, D., & von Sikorski, C. (2021). In the eye of the beholder: A case for the visual hostile media phenomenon. Communication Research, 009365022110185. https://doi.org/10.1177/00936502211018596 Petrosyan, A. (2023). Internet and social media users in the world 2023 | Statista. Statista; Statista. https://www.statista.com/statistics/617136/digital-population-worldwide/