You should question much of what you read about the war in Gaza

Former Washington Post Baghdad bureau chief Luisa Laraque is out of luck.

That means her recent coverage of the Middle East, including the war in Gaza, includes a surprising number of corrections and clarifications, including an editor’s note of more than 200 words.

Laraque, whose title was changed to “foreign correspondent” in 2023, made headlines this week when he accused the Western free press of being on the wrong side of the Gaza war.

“27,000 people died in Gaza.” she tweetedMost of them are civilians, as the world’s most influential newspaper publishes an article comparing Arabs to insects, aid workers to terrorist organizations and Michigan’s entire Muslim community to jihadists. . The world is turned upside down. ”

Among other things, the tweet appears to express anger at 12 staff members of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency in the Gaza Strip. was definitely accused Charged with participating in the October 7 terrorist attack in which more than 1,000 Israeli civilians were massacred.

More importantly, Laraque’s tweet, like much of her reporting on the war in Gaza, requires some explanation.

The figure of 27,000 she cited came directly from the Hamas-controlled Gaza Ministry of Health. The current death toll may be close to the truth, or it may be greatly inflated for propaganda purposes. It’s hard to say, considering the ministry’s accounting methods are questionable. For example, the ministry is committed to never distinguishing between civilians and combatants in its death toll. (For context, Israel claims to have eliminated an estimated 10,000 Hamas fighters since October 7.)

The point is not to dispute that civilians were killed in Gaza, as is certainly the case. Importantly, the numbers cited by Mr. Laraque are sufficiently dubious that journalists should not uncritically repeat them without proper warning about their origins.

It even assumes that it is appropriate for journalists covering such contentious conflicts to voice such historical opinions on social media. At the very least, this tweet reinforces the impression that Laraque is uncritically sympathetic to Palestine and reflexively critical of Israel, neither of which are appropriate stances in terms of reporting. As they say, the proof is in the pudding.

Last December, Laraque co-authored a report accusing Israel of imposing unreasonable and cruel bureaucratic burdens on Palestinian mothers. According to this article, Israel requires all Palestinian women in the Gaza Strip seeking prenatal and postnatal care in Israel to travel between the two territories without their newborns to meet onerous permit requirements. he claimed. The story is now 230 word editor’s noteThe article confesses that Lalak and his colleagues Sufian Taha and Hajar Harb botched the story, especially by failing to even reach out to the Israeli authorities as allies.

“The article incorrectly stated that all Palestinian mothers who received permission to leave Gaza on humanitarian grounds must return to Gaza to reapply after their permission expires.” In the editor’s note. “In fact, the mothers did not necessarily have to return to Gaza. Article has been updated to note that hospital officials [i.e. not official Israeli state policy] They told the Palestinian mother of two that she needed to return to Gaza to apply for a new permit. ”

It added: “The Post failed to seek comment from Israeli authorities on this story, an omission that falls short of the Post’s standards of impartiality.” This omission may help explain how the Washington Post came to report on non-existent government policies.

On February 9, the Washington Post’s website advertised Mr. Laraq as the paper’s “Baghdad bureau chief.” The online version of her latest report is available at January 30th, referred to her by the same title. Meanwhile, since at least October 2023, Laraque has referred to himself only as a “foreign correspondent” on social media.

A Post spokesperson told me that the paper “does not have a Baghdad bureau chief” and that “Mr. Louisa is the Post’s foreign correspondent.” It’s possible that the title was simply outdated, which does happen, but the spokesperson declined to say exactly when the change occurred. The Post has since updated Lalach’s online author biography and story credits, removing the title “Baghdad bureau chief.”

The paper also declined to comment on the 230-word editor’s note.

In October 2023, by which time Laraque’s title may or may not have changed, she co-reported a story that Al Ahly Hospital in Gaza had undergone a “strike.” . Citing third-party organizations, the report implied that Israel was responsible for what was “likely the deadliest single attack on civilians in the Gaza Strip since the conflict began.” The report also cited the Hamas-controlled Ministry of Health as putting the death toll in hospitals at around 500.

The story has since been overturned by more rigorous and less credible investigations, including by the Post itself.

The article, co-authored by Laraque, relied heavily on input from Palestinian officials and Médecins Sans Frontières, both of whom believed that Israelairstrike” The report also cited similar claims from Hamas. The accusations paralleled the brutal details of Israel since October. Invasion of Gaza in July. It is featured extensively throughout the article. The report also carefully details similar airstrikes carried out by the Israel Defense Forces, clearly suggesting that this was part of a pattern.

The article featured a line dedicated to Israel’s denial of responsibility for the Al-Ahly hospital incident. The paragraph refers to Israeli officials who claimed that the explosion was likely caused by an errant rocket fired by the anti-Israel group Palestinian Islamic Jihad, a claim later confirmed by the U.S. intelligence agency, Human Rights Watch. It was supported by multiple groups, including Rights Watch and even Washington. The post itself.

Third parties later estimated that the death toll from the misfire was probably between 100 and 300. This means that the number of deaths attributed to Hamas may have been exaggerated by two to five times the actual number. What does this mean for the Hamas-derived figure of 27,000 quoted above?

The Washington Post stands by its coverage of the Al Ahly Hospital strike.

“The Post is proud of its coverage of the A’Arli Hospital strike,” a spokesperson told me. “Essentially alone in the news organization, we have made the responsible decision to flag this incident by suspending Hamas’ claims that Israel is at fault.” An earlier version of this article said: It contained claims from both sides, but it was clear what was verifiable and what was not.”

Indeed, the Washington Post does not quote Hamas as criticizing Israel by name.

Rather, the paper quoted Hamas as describing the attack as a “crime of genocide” that “reveals the ugly face of this criminal enemy.” This clearly refers to Israel.

There are other smaller examples where Loveluck’s efforts fell short. October report The title is “Israel announces end of Hamas rule in Gaza as casualties soar”. The article quotes a “war expert” who appears to have claimed that Israel dropped almost as many bombs in one week as the United States dropped on Afghanistan in one of the most intense years of airstrikes in history. ing.

This article has now been corrected and reads as follows: “An earlier version of this article said 7,423 bombs were dropped by the U.S.-led coalition, the most bombs dropped in any year during the war in Afghanistan. This is the highest number since 2006, when the military began releasing attack data on a monthly basis.” In other words, the comparison may have some validity, but only if you ignore actual intrusions. It means that it will be done.

This exact same fix appeared for the second time In November, Laraque co-authored another article that made the same false claims about U.S. airstrikes in Afghanistan.

There are more examples of errors or inaccuracies It’s small, but you get the gist. What remains is an established pattern of Mr. Laraque’s incredible reporting on Hamas, coupled with his occasional rants on social media.

At least four corrections were published, including one reprint, one casual war crimes allegation, and one lengthy editor’s note, all in just four months. This seems too bad for a foreign correspondent, much less someone who once held the title of bureau chief.

Beckett Adams is a writer living in Washington. National Journalism Center.