Three years after the October 7 attacks in southern Israel, one of the clearest shifts in the way news organizations cover Gaza has occurred largely behind the scenes: Reporters and editors must become increasingly clear not only about what they know, but how they know it.
The conflict created a dramatic rivalry for newsrooms. Images and video from Gaza could travel around the world within minutes, providing journalists with a wealth of evidence to investigate. At the same time, Israel’s restrictions on independent access by foreign media meant that many international reporters could not use one of the oldest tools to verify a story: seeing it for themselves.
That tension has made open source verification, attribution and reporting more central to daily news gathering. Techniques including geolocation, satellite imagery and video analysis existed long before October 7, 2023, but Gaza has tested them on an unusual scale, forcing newsrooms to verify material from a place most foreign reporters cannot yet penetrate.
The movement has changed more than the tools reporters use. It has also changed how stories are written and presented, with news organizations placing more emphasis on what they can independently verify, where information has come from and what remains uncertain. In an information environment where false or manipulated material can spread before reporters have time to verify it, these differences can shape how accurately audiences understand events unfolding on the ground.
That pressure has pushed newsrooms to put more emphasis on technology and verification methods. For example, CNN’s process for verifying third-party content includes geolocation, background image searches and chrono positioning, along with AI manipulation checks and analysis of satellite and aerial imagery.
Caroline Paterson, CNN’s vice president of international news gathering, said Gaza has made these methods particularly important because of the lack of access.
“The lack of access to Gaza has certainly meant that those methods have given more weight to that story,” Paterson told TheWrap.
She said the broader trend reflects the “changing nature of today’s conflict,” where access is often difficult and materials that are not verified, recycled or treated can spread quickly.
Paterson said these methods were already being developed and used at CNN, drawing on lessons from Ukraine, Sudan and Yemen.
CNN also uses experts to analyze images and video, including identifying objects such as munitions fragments when determining responsibility for a strike.
One of the earliest demonstrations of the opposition came just 10 days after the Hamas attack.
After an explosion at Al-Ahli Arab Hospital in Gaza City on October 17, 2023, Palestinian officials blamed an Israeli airstrike, while Israel denied responsibility and blamed a failed Palestinian rocket launch. The confusing early coverage quickly became a case study of the dangers of reporting claims that could not yet be independently established.
The New York Times later admitted that early drafts of its coverage had relied too much on Hamas claims and had not sufficiently disclosed that those claims could not be immediately verified, according to an editor’s note examining the early coverage.
CNN reviewed social media and broadcast footage, video from a freelance journalist inside Gaza and satellite imagery while speaking with weapons and explosives experts. His investigation found the most likely explanation was a rocket launched from Gaza that broke apart in mid-air, although CNN said a definitive conclusion was impossible without physical evidence from the site.
The BBC was already building similar capabilities. BBC Verify, which launched months before October 7, brought together journalists specializing in open source information, data analysis, fact-finding and visual verification.
Verification of user-generated content has been part of BBC journalism for more than two decades, according to background information provided to TheWrap. But the rise of AI-generated and manipulated content has added a new layer: BBC Verify journalists now regularly assess material for signs of AI before using it.
That assessment is accompanied by more traditional methods of verification, including comparing footage from different sources and angles, geolocating images and video and using satellite imagery and aircraft or ship tracking.
These methods become particularly important when journalists cannot freely reach the places they cover. In Gaza, newsrooms may need to investigate material that appears through social media while relying on journalists and other sources within the region.
The BBC said it is committed to reporting the Israel-Gaza conflict “impartially, and to the highest journalistic standards,” saying part of its role is to combat misinformation and disinformation.
Limited availability
Israel has restricted independent access to foreign journalists since the start of the conflict, while allowing some reporters to enter Gaza on visits strictly controlled by the Israeli military. Israeli authorities have cited security concerns, including the risk that reporters could expose soldiers’ positions, while news agencies have argued that sponsored visits cannot replace independent reporting.
In April, leaders from more than two dozen major news organizations – including CNN, BBC News, Reuters, the Associated Press, The New York Times and The Washington Post – asked Israel to allow independent access to foreign reporters, arguing that journalists must be able to question official accounts, speak directly to civilians and condition evidence.
The restrictions leave international news organizations disproportionately dependent on Palestinian journalists inside Gaza, footage from witnesses, aid groups, government applications and material circulating online – making clear detection and implementation even more important. The BBC said they have been relying on freelance journalists and direct evidence from people in the area.
Reporters must increasingly tell the audience not only what is claimed, but what is actually established: Who is claiming? Can the location be verified? Is the footage current? Is there an image or other satellite view being maintained? And when these questions cannot be answered, how obvious should that uncertainty be revealed?
The same applies to responsibility for attacks, casualty numbers and battlefield developments. News organizations must again distinguish between what Israeli or Palestinian officials say happened and what their own reporters have independently established.
In a fast-moving conflict, that difference can be the difference between reporting on a claim and presenting one account as undisputed truth.
None of these methods started with Gaza. Wars in Syria and Ukraine had already forced newsrooms to become more sophisticated about verifying material produced beyond the reach of their own reporters. But Gaza has combined these challenges: a major international story, a large number of images and claims circulating online, and severe restrictions on the ability of foreign journalists to independently see what was happening on the ground.
Three years later, that is perhaps one of the clearest legacies of the conflict for newsrooms. In an era when audiences see an event before reporters can confirm it, the job is not just to tell them what happened. He wants to show them why they should believe.
