Treating Al Jazeera’s Anas al-Sharif as a bona fide journalist — hunted and killed on account of his heroic pursuit of the truth — The Los Angeles Times’ Nabih Bulos dismisses information revealing that the slain purported newsman was the head of a Hamas cell and was responsible for rocket attacks (page one in Aug. 12 print edition, “Journalist slain in Israeli strike was a voice in war-torn Gaza,” and online here).

The Society of Professional Journalists Code of Ethics exhorts media practitioners to “seek truth and report it.” In stubbornly promoting the dubious portrait of al-Sharif as a professional journalist faithfully doing his job under fire, Bulos degrades his own truth-seeker credentials.

“Israel’s military targeted a tent for journalists in Gaza City late Sunday, killing seven people, including Anas al-Sharif, a reporter for Al Jazeera who drew millions of followers on social media and emerged as a top voice in the Arab world for his chronicling of the war in Gaza over the last 22 months,” Bulos’ article begins.

The page-one headline likewise emphasizes that Al-Sharif “was a voice in war-torn Gaza,” and Bulos quotes an Al Jazeera statement in the article’s fourth paragraph: “The order to assassinate Anas al-Sharif, one of Gaza’s bravest journalists, and his colleagues, is a desperate attempt to silence the voices exposing the impending seizure and occupation of Gaza.”

Yet for all of Bulos’ apparent concern for the silencing of the “top voice,” The Los Angeles Times correspondent’s own work is a remarkable case of doing just that: In particular, Bulos spares not one word on al-Sharif’s myriad and unabashed pronouncements praising attacks on Israeli civilians and pro-terror sentiments, which belie The Times’ clumsily crafted portrait of a hunted journalist.

According to the findings of CAMERA Arabic, on 17 occasions from November 2021 until October 2023, Anas al-Sharif celebrated and justified Palestinian attacks which targeted and killed Israeli civilians, calling the perpetrators “heroes” and “martyrs,” and the attacks “heroic operations.” (A list of al-Sharif’s online praise for terror is appended to the bottom of this post.)

On Oct. 7, 2023, as thousands of terrorists still rampaged through southern Israeli communities, butchering, raping, burning, kidnapping and looting, “the top voice for in the Arab world for his chronicling the war in Gaza” could not contain his glee, sharing on social media: “9 hours and the heroes are still roaming the country and capturing … God, God, how great you are.”

Far from seeking the truth, Bulos silences the uncomfortable truth of the courageous “journalist” joyfully applauding terror. Rather than quoting or even mentioning any of al-Sharif’s numerous pro-terror outbursts, The Los Angeles Times perhaps alludes to them in the 14th paragraph, dismissing them as nothing more than a questionable Israeli accusation:

Sunday’s drone attack came weeks after Israel stepped up its attacks on Al-Sharif, with the military’s Arabic language spokesman accusing the Al Jazeera correspondent in July of spreading “propaganda” and taking part in “a false Hamas campaign on starvation.”

And it’s not only Bulos’ coverage of al-Sharif’s incitement that fails to pass another tenet of ethical journalism 101: “Provide context. Take care not to misrepresent or oversimplify in promoting, previewing or summarizing a story.”

Bulos buries the Israeli military’s information that al-Sharif headed a Hamas terror cell and was responsible for rocket attacks, waiting until the seventh paragraph to share:

Israel’s military confirmed it conducted the attack, issuing a statement shortly before midnight Monday saying it struck the terrorist Anas Al-Sharif who it said “posed a journalist” but “served as the head of a terrorist cell” in the militant group Hamas.

It claimed that “previously disclosed intelligence information” and “many documents found in the Gaza Strip” confirmed Al-Sharif’s involvement with Hamas. The documents, which the statement said included personnel rosters and lists of terrorist training courses, among others, “provide proof of the integration of the Hamas terrorist” within Al Jazeera.

Israel Defense Forces spokesman Lt. Col Nadav Shoshani also posted on X (formerly Twitter) screenshots of the relevant Hamas documents, a pertinent fact which Bulos chose to ignore.

STRUCK: Hamas terrorist Anas Al-Sharif, who posed as an Al Jazeera journalist

Al-Sharif was the head of a Hamas terrorist cell and advanced rocket attacks on Israeli civilians and IDF troops.
Intelligence and documents from Gaza, including rosters, terrorist training lists and… pic.twitter.com/ypFaEYDHse

— Israel Defense Forces (@IDF) August 10, 2025

Ignoring that the Hamas documents are publicly available for all who choose to examine them, Bulos charges forward, writing: “Al Jazeera, along with a United Nations expert, the Committee to Protect Journalists and other groups cast doubt on the veracity of the documents.”

He continues:

The Israeli military has previously made unsubstantiated claims that journalists in targeted and killed in Gaza were terrorists. In March, Israeli killed Al Jazeera correspondent Hossam Shabat; in July 2024, it killed Ismail Ghoul and his cameraman Rami al-Rifi.

As with Anas al-Sharif, the IDF released Hamas documents revealing the affiliation of its Beit Hanoun operative Hossam Shabat. Ditto for Ismail Ghoul, an engineer in Hamas’ Gaza City brigade. (According to the IDF and Shin Bet, Ghoul was a Nukhba terrorist who took part in the Oct. 7 massacre, but on this point we did not find publicly released documentation.)

If information backed up by publicly shared Hamas documents is “unsubstantiated,” as Bulos suggests, what could possibly constitute substantiation regarding “journalists” moonlighting as terrorists? Perhaps a broadcast statement from no less than (slain) Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar, seen at left embracing Al Jazeera’s Al-Sharif?

Bulos applies a lower standard of substantiation to Israel’s accusers. Thus, he reports:

Health authorities in Gaza say 237 journalists have been killed since the war began on Oct. 7, 2023. The Committee to Protect Journalists says that at least 186 have been killed.

At no point does he qualify that the claims of the “health authorities” in the Gaza Strip and CPJ are “unsubstantiated.” Nor does he disclose that the Gaza Strip “health authorities” are run by Hamas.

Moreover, Bulos conceals the terrorist affiliations of others he mentions. Thus, he selectively reports:

Chief [Al Jazeera] correspondent Wael al Dahdouh lost his wife, son, daughter and grandson in an Israeli airstrike in October. Weeks after that, he was injured in a strike that killed Al Jazeera cameraman Samer Abu Daqqa.

Bulos neglects to report that the IDF released Islamic Jihad documents revealing that Hamza Wael Dahdouh, Wael al Dahdouh’s son, was a member of the terror group’s electronic engineering unit. The IDF identified Abu Daqqa as the head of Hamas’ aerial unit in Gaza.

Independent researcher David Collier concluded in his 2024 report that, at the time, 50 percent of Palestinian fatalities in Gaza identified by Committee to Protect Journalists as “journalists” were affiliated with proscribed terror groups.

But that overlap of activity simply is not a notion that Bulos is willing to entertain. Untenable claims by Al Jazeera, CPJ and the United Nations are evidence enough for Bulos of one’s journalistic credentials in the Gaza Strip.

But documents originating from Hamas or Islamic Jihad listing the affiliations of their operatives? In Bulos’ eyes, that’s nothing more than evidence of an Israeli ruse.

Tamar Sternthal is director of the Israel office of CAMERA, where a version of this article first appeared.