LA Times Journalists Barred from Covering Gaza after Condemning Israeli Atrocities
TEHRAN (Tasnim) – Reporters at The Los Angeles Times have been prohibited from reporting on Israel’s war in Gaza following their signing of an open letter criticizing media coverage of the conflict and denouncing Israel's killing of journalists in the region.
Journalists at the paper, who signed the letter in mid-November, were banned from Gaza-related stories for at least three months. The letter condemned Israel’s aggressions and sought unbiased coverage, disputing the Israeli regime’s treatment of Palestinians and the killing of journalists in Gaza.
Employees have expressed concerns internally and to LA Times Executive Editor Kevin Merida regarding the ban's fairness. Some plan to present a letter to the management, urging the reversal of the decision to ban the 38 signatories from reporting on Gaza-related matters.
The conflict in Gaza erupted on October 7, and Israel’s atrocities have resulted in the killing of more than 18,000 civilians, including 63 journalists, according to Palestinian Health Minister Mai al-Kalia. The ban follows the signing of an open letter criticizing biased media coverage and calling for fair reporting that accurately reflects the situation in Gaza.
LA Times workers argue that signing the letter was not in violation of the paper’s ethics policy, as the policy doesn't explicitly prohibit open letters. Past instances of signed letters, addressing various concerns, have not faced repercussions. They also argued that the letter argues for unbiased coverage and that condemning the killing of journalists is not a political statement.
A review of the Times ethics policy by LA Public Press confirms that there is no prohibition of open letters explicitly stated in the policy. In the past, LA Times journalists have signed open letters without reprisal, including a 2020 criticizing the treatment of Black journalists at the paper, and its coverage of “the movement for Black lives.” LA Times journalists also frequently express political opinions in public, including on Twitter (now X), without any punishment.
Hillary Manning, LA Times’ vice president of communications, acknowledged concerns but emphasized the paper’s commitment to comprehensive and impartial coverage of the Gaza conflict. The Media Guild of the West plans to discuss the treatment of journalists who signed the letter in an upcoming meeting.
Additionally, the Los Angeles chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations criticized the decision, citing concerns about restricting diversity of opinion and access to information.
While LA Times editorial policy advocates non-ideological reporting, journalists argue that the ban suppresses voices critical of media biases and Israel’s actions in Gaza. The letter insists on factual reporting and condemns Israel’s actions against journalists and civilians.
The ban’s impact on reporting practices and the exclusion of affected journalists from ongoing projects have raised concerns about journalistic freedom and the paper’s credibility in reporting on Gaza. Despite the ban, some ongoing projects, such as the "Gaza Voices Project," are moving forward with limitations due to the exclusion of knowledgeable journalists.
Times staff members who spoke to LA Public Press argue that the letter speaks up against an existing bias among Western media outlets, which it contends “has served to justify the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians” and “(ignores) Israel’s oppression of Palestinians.” The letter argues that “double-standards, inaccuracies and fallacies abound” in coverage of Israeli atrocities against Palestinians and calls on outlets to not shy away from using terms like “apartheid,” “genocide” and “ethnic cleansing” or quote genocide experts to accurately describe what is going on in Gaza. The letter also condemns Israel for killing journalists in Gaza, as well as their family members, and calls on the Israeli government to stop.
The decision to restrict coverage areas has had a chilling effect in the newsroom, raising questions about the freedom to express concerns and fear of repercussions for doing so. Concerns have also been raised regarding the implications of continuing to speak out against the coverage ban.
The news that the LA Times had limited “nearly a dozen” journalists from Gaza coverage was first reported on by Maxwell Tani at Semafor. LA Public Press received a list of LA Times signatories that totaled 38 journalists. One source estimated that nearly half of the staffers of Middle Eastern and North African (MENA) descent have been banned from coverage and that staffers of color were also disproportionately affected. The source called this a “discriminatory decision.”
Suhauna Hussain, a labor and business reporter at the Times who signed the letter, noted on the social media platform X (formerly Twitter), that taking those who signed off coverage “in effect removes a great many Muslim journalists and most of (sic) not all Palestinians at the LA Times from coverage.”
LA Times receives mixed reviews for Gaza coverage. While it's the only major U.S. newspaper with an editorial board calling for a Gaza ceasefire, some journalists criticize its dehumanizing language, biased reporting on casualties, and an imbalance of voices.
Journalists express concern over coverage restrictions, affecting their ability to address biases. Some removed from ongoing projects like "Gaza Voices," impacting reporting on young Palestinians' stories due to bans on qualified reporters.
LA Public Press received a statement from Council on American-Islamic Relations-LA, highlighting how the LA Times' ban on certain journalists disproportionately silences Palestinian, Muslim, and Arab voices. This action raises concerns about trust and credibility, creating fear in the newsroom about speaking out.
Journalists fear severe consequences for speaking on Gaza. Over 30 withdrew from the open letter due to employer reprisal concerns. Nearly 1,500 journalists criticize Israel-Palestine coverage by US and English media with a bias towards Israel.
LA Times debates the letter's political implications, urging the use of terms like "ethnic cleansing,” “apartheid” and "genocide" to accurately depict Gaza events, rejecting word manipulation as unethical, otherwise “contorting our words to hide evidence of war crimes or Israel’s oppression of Palestinians is journalistic malpractice and an abdication of moral clarity.”
UN experts label the violence as "genocide in the making," with scholars and rights organizations emphasizing ethnic cleansing and apartheid, highlighting the severity of Israel's actions in Gaza.
UN Experts and human rights organizations have labeled the ongoing Israeli violence as "genocide in the making," and “a clear intention of ethnic cleansing”, while some even have gone further calling it “a textbook case of genocide.” Human rights organizations and Amnesty International have also used the term “apartheid” to describe Israel’s treatment of Palestinians.
