While some media outlets allege that Israel has something insidious to hide by not allowing foreign journalists into Gaza, the demand to be allowed access is a genuine and understandable one coming from some reliable news outlets.

But Reporters Without Borders (RSF) has taken this demand and turned it into a full-on campaign, whose thinly-veiled purpose is a betrayal of journalistic ethics.

That RSF partnered with the activist group Avaaz should have raised red flags in newsrooms around the world. Perhaps because of this, despite the proud boasts of RSF claiming to have over 200 global media outlets signed up, the results of the pair’s media blackout of Israel should be put in perspective.

It was supposed to be a global media blackout — dark front covers, demonstrations, and rage. But the majority of the participating media were fringe outlets or from countries with a limited global influence (like The New Arab or Venezuela’s Tal Sucal).

Nonetheless, the presence of NPR and The Independent should raise some eyebrows.

Unethical Campaign

A unified campaign message meant to be promoted by every media outlet says it all: “At the rate journalists are being killed in Gaza reporting on Israel’s war, there will soon be none left to keep you informed.”

The first of RSF’s demands is “the protection of Palestinian journalists and an end to the impunity for crimes perpetrated by the Israeli army against them in the Gaza Strip.”

Clearly, the campaign is aimed solely at blaming Israel and accusing it of deliberately killing journalists.

It ignores evidence that (a) Israel is not deliberately targeting genuine journalists, and (b) dozens of so-called journalists killed by the IDF in Gaza were, in fact, either affiliated with terror organizations or working as actual terrorist operatives.

Indeed, the campaign mentions the death of Al Jazeera “journalist” Anas Al-Sharif in an Israeli strike last month, omitting hard evidence presented by the IDF proving that he was a commander of a terrorist cell in a Hamas rocket-launching platoon.

And while the organizers choose to decry the deteriorating living conditions faced by local Gazan journalists, who are no different than any other resident of the embattled enclave, there’s no mention of the intimidation genuine journalists face from Hamas, or the threats from the terrorist organization to independent journalism in the Strip.

Local journalists in Gaza work under Hamas’ watchful eye, out of bias or fear.

The campaign effectively asks fellow journalists to do the exact opposite of what their profession demands: take sides.

Because it is not really about media access or solidarity with Gaza journalists — consensus issues that sound easy to agree to.

It’s all about demonizing and delegitimizing Israel.

And the media situation is not unique to Israel.

The IDF has allowed embedded journalists to accompany its forces in the same way that other armies, such as the US in Iraq, have done. Gaza is a warzone. Other Western armies that do not wish to see foreign journalists come to harm take the same precautions as the IDF has.

No army wants to add foreign journalists to the mix when it comes to operational considerations. None of this is about “covering up” the harsh realities, particularly when an enormous amount of (enemy-controlled) footage is being beamed from inside Gaza already.

These outlets aren’t reporting the news — they’re performing a script designed to delegitimize Israel.

Scripts are pre-written, visuals standardized, timelines synchronized, hashtags dictated.

What an absolute embarrassment. pic.twitter.com/Y9Y8QN56Lc

— Eitan Fischberger (@EFischberger) August 31, 2025

Media Lip Service

The two largest wire agencies — Reuters or AP — did not blacken their home pages. Nor did The Washington Post, CNN, or The New York Times.

This is because professional outlets still believe it is wrong for agenda-driven NGOs to dictate their policy.

In a cowardly fashion, The New York Times jumped on the bandwagon with an editorial, thereby amplifying the message without signing up to the campaign, similar to what The Guardian did. And CNN reported on it, thereby giving the campaign the publicity it sought.

Ultimately, this was not only an anti-Israel campaign, but also an anti-journalistic one.

Professional journalists — not terrorists in disguise or their biased colleagues — deserve to be treated with respect, but they should not be dancing to anyone’s tune.

And let’s not forget the attitude shown by the media towards any kind of pro-Israel campaigning, whether coordinated or not — sometimes dismissively rejected as “hasbara” to delegitimize those attempting to carry out public diplomacy or activism on behalf of Israel.

That a few hundred media outlets felt that a coordinated campaign that crosses the line from journalism into (anti-Israel) activism is a legitimate activity, speaks volumes about the hypocrisy present in newsrooms across the globe.

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