Our International Institute for Social and Legal Studies (IISLS) collaborated with Fifty Global Research Group to conduct a groundbreaking study and partnered with The Henry Jackson Society to amplify its findings. Published recently in The Telegraph, the research debunks inflated casualty figures reported by Hamas. Within days, it gained significant global resonance, featuring in major international media across multiple languages, garnering millions of social media views, and attracting the attention of policymakers worldwide. This study highlights IISLS’s dedication to impactful and transparent legal and sociopolitical research.

The research shows that the world’s leading English-language media often fail to distinguish between civilian and militant casualties when reporting on casualties in Gaza. This promotes a narrative that claims ‘Israel has killed 35,000 civilians in Gaza,' which is not true.

An example is CNN’s Fareed Zakaria’s statement to Naftali Bennett: ‘It killed 35,000 civilians.'

Although the IDF provides data on terrorists killed, this data is systematically disregarded as a credible source.

Our pilot study analysed 1,378 articles from the world’s major media outlets (CNN, BBC, The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Guardian, The Associated Press, Reuters, ABC).

The conflict in Gaza has become a major topic in international news. Information about casualties in this conflict shapes public opinion, influences political decisions and legal processes.

Leading English-language publications often omit data on militant casualties, forming a misconception of the death toll.

Media analysed:
BBC, CNN, The New York Times, The Guardian, The Washington Post, Associated Press, Reuters, ABC.
Period: February — May 2024.
Sample size: 1,378 articles, statistically significant sample.

Methods:
• Coding of quotes from articles (76 codes, of which 39 were retained for analysis).
• Double independent validation of data.
• Use of OSINT methodologies.

Key findings
1. Underrepresentation of Israeli data:

• Only 3% of articles use Israeli data.
• Hamas data is found in 98% of sources.

2. Lack of critical analysis of Hamas data:

• 19% of articles present Hamas data as credible without citing a source.

3. Double standards in data verification:

• Only 1% of articles indicate that Hamas data is unreliable.
• Nearly half of the articles question Israel’s data.

Methodology
1. Sample size:

• CNN: 119 articles
• BBC: 189 articles
• The New York Times: 126 articles
• The Guardian: 246 articles
• The Washington Post: 184 articles
• ABC: 111 articles
• Reuters: 199 articles
• Associated Press: 208 articles

2. Precautions against bias:

• The research team is represented by volunteers from around the world, strangers to each other
• Voluntary principle of participation without monetary reward.

Expert Panel:

• Tatiana Glaeser — project director
• Maria Otto-Mendel — project coordinator
• Kirill Titaev, PhD — scientific and legal adviser
• Viktor Vakhshtayn, PhD — scientific adviser
• Alexander Zernopolsky — legal consultant
• Mark Novikov, PhD — media consultant
• Vitaly Novoselov — media consultant
• Elena Zelentsova, PhD — scientific counsellor

Volunteers:
42 people, including data collection, analytics and visualisation specialists.

E-mail: research@fifty.global / Tvglezer@gmail.com
Website: Fifty.global
Fifty Research Group © 2024

International Institute for Social and Legal Studies
E-mail: azernopolsky@gmail.com
Website: iisls.org