WHERE TESTIMONY DIES: THE REPRESENTATIONAL CHALLENGE OF JOURNALISTS KILLED IN GAZA WITHIN WESTERN MEDIA

Öz

Since 7 October 2023, Gaza has become not only a site where civilians are relentlessly targeted, but also a lethal terrain in which journalists—those who pursue truth on the frontlines—have been systematically attacked. According to international press freedom organizations, more than 200 journalists and media workers have been killed during this period, marking an unprecedented level of loss in modern war history. Comparative data underscores the exceptional nature of this situation: fewer than 15 journalists were killed in the first two years of the Russia–Ukraine war, while the deadliest phase of the Iraq War resulted in approximately 20 journalist deaths. Despite this extraordinary pattern, the greatest journalist death toll in contemporary history has often remained marginal within the news discourse of mainstream Western media, where notable tendencies toward silence, selectivity, and discursive reduction have been observed. This study examines how journalists killed in Gaza are represented in Western media and aims to analyse the discursive mechanisms underpinning this limited visibility. Based on keyword-driven searches, 29 news items and opinion pieces published from 2025 onward were selected for analysis. The study adopts a qualitative research design and focuses on the discursive structures embedded in news texts. The study concludes that the news discourse on Gaza constructs a narrative regime that restricts the flow of information. By revealing how the deaths of journalists—one of the critical thresholds of conflict reporting and media representation—are framed in Western press narratives, this research aims to contribute to ongoing debates on the systematic suppression of testimony, the politicisation of news value, and the discursive constraints placed on the transmission of truth.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Journalist Deaths
• Media Representation
• The Guardian
• Gaza Conflict
• Conflict Journalism

Tanıklığın Öldüğü Yer: Gazze'de Hayatını Kaybeden Gazetecilerin Batı Medyasında Temsil Sorunu

Öz

Gazze, 7 Ekim 2023’ten bu yana yalnızca sivillerin değil, gerçeğin izini süren gazetecilerin de sistematik biçimde hedef alındığı bir ölüm coğrafyasına dönüşmüştür. Uluslararası basın örgütlerinin verilerine göre bu dönemde 200’ün üzerinde gazeteci ve medya çalışanı hayatını kaybetmiş, bu sayı modern savaş tarihinde benzeri görülmemiş bir düzeye ulaşmıştır. Karşılaştırmalı veriler, Gazze’deki durumu daha da çarpıcı kılmaktadır: Rusya–Ukrayna savaşında iki yılda ölen gazeteci sayısı 15’in altında, Irak savaşının en sıcak döneminde ise yaklaşık 20 civarında kalmıştır. Bu olağanüstü tabloya rağmen tarihin en büyük gazeteci kaybı Batı ana akım medyasının haber söylemlerinde çoğu zaman geri planda kalmış; olayların aktarımında belirgin bir sessizlik, seçicilik ve indirgeme eğilimi gözlenmiştir. Bu çalışma, Gazze’de yaşamını yitiren gazetecilerin Batı medyasında nasıl temsil edildiğini inceleyerek bu görünürlük sorununun arkasındaki söylemsel mekanizmaları analiz etmeyi amaçlamaktadır. Araştırma kapsamında, belirlenen anahtar kelimeler üzerinden yapılan tarama sonucunda 2025 yılından itibaren yayımlanan 29 içerik incelemeye alınmıştır. Çalışma, nitel araştırma yaklaşımı çerçevesinde yürütülmüş ve haber metinlerinin söylemsel yapısını çözümlemeye odaklanılmıştır. Çalışmanın sonucunda, Gazze’ye dair haber söyleminin bilgi akışını sınırlayan bir anlatı rejimi oluşturduğu tespit edilmiştir. Araştırma, çatışma haberciliği ve medya temsilinin kritik eşiklerinden biri olan gazeteci ölümlerinin Batı basınındaki yansımalarını ortaya koyarak, tanıklığın sistematik biçimde bastırılması, haber değerinin politikleşmesi ve gerçeğin aktarımının söylemsel olarak sınırlandırılması gibi güncel tartışmalara katkıda bulunmayı hedeflemektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Gazeteci Ölümleri
• Medya Temsilleri
• The Guardian
• Gazze Çatışması
• Çatışma Haberciliği

Kaynakça

1. Abu-Fadil, M. (2023). Journalism under fire: Reporting from conflict zones in the Middle East. Beirut Press.
2. Allan, S. (2014). Witnessing in crisis: Photojournalism and the rise of citizen journalism. Polity Press.
3. Allan, S., ve Owen, T. (2020). Journalism, trauma and the future of news. Routledge.
4. Allan, S., ve Zelizer, B. (Eds.). (2004). Reporting war: Journalism in wartime. Routledge.
5. Barkho, L. (2013). News discourse and ideology: BBC and Al Jazeera reporting of the Middle East. Routledge.
6. Bishara, A. (2024). Gaza’s voice: Local journalists and the politics of witnessing. Stanford University Press.
7. Boltanski, L. (1999). Distant suffering: Morality, media and politics. Cambridge University Press.
8. Butler, J. (2009). Frames of war: When is life grievable? Verso.

9. Campbell, J. L., Quincy, C., Osserman, J., ve Pedersen, O. K. (2013). Coding in-depth semistructured interviews: Problems of unitization and intercoder reliability. Sociological Methods & Research, 42(3), 294–320. https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124113500475
10. Carruthers, S. L. (2011). The media at war: Communication and conflict in the modern era. Palgrave Macmillan.
11. Chouliaraki, L. (2006). The spectatorship of suffering. Sage.
12. Chouliaraki, L. (2013). The ironic spectator: Solidarity in the age of post-humanitarianism. Polity.
13. Cohen, S. (2001). States of denial: Knowing about atrocities and suffering. Polity Press.
14. Committee to Protect Journalists. (2023). Journalists killed in 2022–2023. https://cpj.org
15. Committee to Protect Journalists. (2024). Journalist casualties in the Israel-Gaza conflict. https://cpj.org
16. Cottle, S. (2006). Mediatized conflict. Open University Press.
17. Cottle, S. (2017). Reporting dangerously: Journalist killed, jailed and threatened around the world. Palgrave Macmillan.
18. Cottle, S., ve Sambrook, R. (2021). Journalism, public trust, and the future of conflict reporting. Reuters Institute.
19. de León, C. (2022). Surveillance and war: How digital tracking reshapes conflict. MIT Press.
20. Denzin, N. K., ve Lincoln, Y. S. (2018). The handbook of qualitative research (5th ed.). SAGE.
21. Entman, R. M. (1993). Framing: Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication, 43(4), 51–58. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1993.tb01304.x
22. Entman, R. M. (2004). Projections of power: Framing news, public opinion, and U.S. foreign policy. University of Chicago Press.
23. Fairclough, N. (1995A). Critical discourse analysis: The critical study of language. Longman.
24. Fairclough, N. (1995B). Media discourse. Edward Arnold.
25. Feierstein, D. (2017). Media, truth, and the Iraq war. Rutgers University Press.
26. Feldman, I. (2024). Killing the witness: War, media, and the politics of erasure in Gaza. University of California Press.
27. Galtung, J., ve Ruge, M. (1965). The structure of foreign news. Journal of Peace Research, 2(1), 64–91.
28. Gillespie, T. (2018). Custodians of the internet. Yale University Press.
29. Guest, G., MacQueen, K. M., ve Namey, E. (2012). Applied thematic analysis. SAGE. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781483384436
30. Hall, S. (1997). Representation: Cultural representations and signifying practices. Sage.
31. Hamilton, J. (2020). Conflict journalism in the digital age: Risks, ethics and technology. Oxford University Press.
32. Herman, E. S., ve Chomsky, N. (1988). Manufacturing consent: The political economy of the mass media. Pantheon.
33. International Committee of the Red Cross. (2016). Protection of journalists in armed conflicts: Legal frameworks and obligations. ICRC Publications. https://www.icrc.org
34. Losh, E. (2022). Writing for the algorithm: Digital witnessing in the age of extremism. MIT Press.
35. Lynch, M. (2015). The Arab uprisings explained: New contentious politics in the Middle East. Columbia University Press.
36. Pappé, I. (2016). Ten myths about Israel. Verso.
37. Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research & evaluation methods (4th ed.). SAGE.
38. Reporters Without Borders. (2024). Press freedom index 2024: Deadliest conflict for journalists – Gaza. https://rsf.org
39. Said, E. (1978). Orientalism. Pantheon Books.
40. Said, S. (1984). The question of Palestine. Vintage.
41. Taher, M. (2023). Media workers under occupation. Birzeit University Press.
42. Tracy, S. J. (2010). Qualitative quality: Eight “big-tent” criteria for excellent qualitative research. Qualitative Inquiry, 16(10), 837–851. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800410383121
43. Tufekci, Z. (2017). Twitter and tear gas: The power and fragility of networked protest. Yale University Press.
44. Tufekci, Z. (2023). Algorithmic power and the politics of visibility. Oxford University Press.
45. Tumber, H., ve Palmer, J. (2004). Media at war. Sage.
46. van Dijk, T. A. (1995). Discourse semantics and ideology. Discourse & Society, 6(2), 243–289.
47. van Dijk, T. A. (1998). Ideology: A multidisciplinary approach. Sage.
48. van Dijk, T. A. (2000A). Critical discourse studies: A sociocognitive approach. In R. Wodak & M. Meyer (Eds.), Methods of critical discourse analysis (pp. 62–86). SAGE.
49. van Dijk, T. A. (2000B). Ideology and discourse: A multidisciplinary introduction. University of Amsterdam Press.
50. Wodak, R. (2015). The politics of fear: What right-wing populist discourses mean. Sage.
51. Wodak, R., ve Meyer, M. (2016). Methods of critical discourse studies (3rd ed.). Sage.
52. Zand, B. (2024). Reporting while grieving: Journalistic trauma in the Gaza war. International Journal of Conflict Communication, 12(3), 211–230.
53. Zelizer, B. (2005). Death in wartime: Photographs and the politics of shock. In B. Zelizer & S. Allan (Eds.), Journalism after September 11 (pp. 48–68). Routledge.
54. Zelizer, B. (2010). About to die: How news images move the public. Oxford University Press.