War reporters are crucial to report Gaza's true horror, writes Jennifer O'Mahony in an excellent First Post article.
As she notes, there are journalists inside Gaza, notably from Al-Jazeera, but Israel refuses to allow the rest of the international press to join them. O'Mahony writes:
"Firstly, we simply do not know what is happening inside Gaza at any one time. We are ignorant, for example, of the reasons for the bombing of a UN school packed with civilians which left 40 dead. The rumours of a text message which indicated Hamas leaders were hiding out in the building show that hearsay is not an excuse when the phrase 'war crimes' is being used by the UN...
"Secondly, Israel's blockade on information has led to skewed coverage of both sides... as the journalists stuck on the border are forced to interview the only sources of information they have access to: the Israelis.
"Hamas issue statements as best they can, but with some of the leadership hiding in Damascus, and the bombing of their government buildings and TV station by Israel, a media offensive is difficult at best. This means that Hamas is lacking in the most important currency in international opinion: good PR."
It is clear from Oliver Luft's article on Media Guardian today that journalists across the world are furious at being denied access to a theatre of war (and, yes, it is a war).
However, we should not overlook the work of Al Jazeera English, exemplified by its TV broadcasts and the material available on its website. For many of us trying to follow what's happening, it is an essential news outlet.
It has two reporters on the ground - Ayman Mohyeldin, a 29 year-old American of Egyptian and Palestinian descent and Sherine Tadros, 28, who holds joint British and Egyptian citizenship. There is also one staff cameraman. They have been in Gaza since last year, shortly before the border was closed.
I understand that their sterling work for Al Jazeera is now being watched in 130m households and the number is growing by the day as more and more people switch to the broadcaster to find out what is really happening in Gaza.
So, in many ways, this conflict means as much to Al Jazeera's profile as the first gulf war meant to CNN. In that sense, it could be seen as a seminal point in the channel's history. However, it has still not overcome the fact that the overwhelming majority of Americans cannot see its TV output.
The channel has been marginalised in the US, as the International Herald Tribune reported this week. It is only carried by cable providers in Burlington, Vermont; Toledo, Ohio; and Washington DC. IHT's Noam Cohen writes:
"The near-total blackout in the United States is no doubt related to the sharp criticism Al Jazeera received from the US government during the initial stages of the war in Iraq for its coverage of the American invasion.
"Officials like vice president Dick Cheney and the defence secretary at the time, Donald Rumsfeld, said the network's reporting was inflammatory, irresponsible and frequently misleading."
I don't think that was true at the time and it certainly isn't the case now. I often tune into Al Jazeera English and respect what those Gaza reporters are doing, and how they are going about their work.
Anyway, even Americans cannot be denied the website. No wonder the channel has begun an ad campaign to publicise its site in the US, the country that is most in need of receiving more balanced reportage on the conflict.
