The New York Times, as well as other Western publications, have received extensive criticism over Gaza war coverage [Getty]
Western news outlets have come under fire over their portrayal of US President Donald Trump’s plan to forcibly expel Palestinians from Gaza, with critics accusing them of softening the language to obscure what is widely considered ethnic cleansing.
On Monday, The New York Times (NYT) faced criticism for a headline on Trump’s plan, which involves the permanent expulsion of Palestinians from Gaza under the guise of a reconstruction project to turn the enclave into the “Riviera of the Middle East”.
An initial NYT headline read: “Trump says he could cut aid to Jordan and Egypt over Gaza Development Plan”, but following backlash, the title replaced “Gaza Development Plan” with “If They Don’t Take Gazans”.
Assal Rad, historian and author, called out the initial headline and urged the use of the term ethnic cleansing. Following the change, she said: “‘Take Gazans’ is still a euphemism for ETHNIC CLEANSING. Call it what it is”.
Rad also highlighted a CNN headline which called Trump’s proposal a “redevelopment plan”.
“CNN is actually framing ethnic cleansing like a real-estate development,” Rad said.
President of the Foundation for Middle East Peace, Lara Friedman, said that NYT the headline was “exhibit A” for manufacturing consent.
Meanwhile, the BBCÂ was criticised for using the term “relocate” to describe Trump’s demands to displace Palestinians from Gaza to Jordan.
The New Arab contacted NYT, the BBC and CNN for comment, but did not receive responses at the time of publication.
Media ‘softening language’ on forced displacement
Several other Western outlets have also been accused of downplaying the implications of Trump’s Gaza plan.
Both British dailies The Telegraph and The Times focused on Trump’s description of Gaza as the “Riviera of the Middle East”, rather than addressing concerns over the expulsion of Palestinians.
An analysis by Al Jazeera‘s Listening Post programme argued that such framing promotes Gaza as a tourist destination rather than acknowledging the plan as a crime against humanity.
It also noted that, while varying in wording, other outlets — including The Independent, Reuters, and The Washington Post — have similarly avoided explicitly labelling the plan as ethnic cleansing.
Trump’s latest plan has received severe backlash from across the region, with some of the strongest messaging coming from Egypt and Jordan which, under the plan, would take the majority of displaced Palestinians from the enclave.
Jordan’s King Abdullah II said in a post on social media that during his meeting with Trump on Tuesday he had “reiterated Jordan’s steadfast position against the displacement of Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank”.
Egypt on Tuesday said that it was putting in a plan that would uphold Palestinian rights and see the implementation of a two-state solution. Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi also urged that any reconstruction of Gaza must be done “without displacing Palestinians”.
Saudi Arabia issued a stark warning against the plan and rebuffed Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s remarks that a Palestinian state could be in Saudi Arabia.
The Saudi Foreign Ministry called the comments “the words of an extremist, occupying mindset that fails to grasp the significance of Palestinian land to its people”, adding that “the Palestinian people have a legitimate right to their land. They are not outsiders or migrants who can be expelled at Israel’s will”.Â
Over the course of Israel’s latest war on Gaza, Western press agencies have been frequently accused of holding a pro-Israel slant in their coverage.
An analysis from the Muslim Council of Britain’s Centra e For MediMonitoring in 2024 found that large segments of UK media appeared to hold a pro-Israel bias in their coverage of the war.
Reports have also emerged of alleged internal conflicts at the BBC, NYT as well as the LA Times over coverage of the war.
