Talk:Misinformation in the Israel–Hamas war

Strong POV and OR in article

I know this article is new, but the POV on it is just through the roof. To take an obvious example: to the best of my knowledge, we still don't know the truth of the "40 beheaded babies". According to the article, it's misinformation. It might very well be, but how do we know? And how come the article focuses so much on that particular point, but no mention of the misinformation campaign claiming there were no beheadings, and that no children were killed, though both are well documented. If the aim of this page is that anyone just adds whatever they think is misinformation, I can foretell a lot of edit warring and POV pushing. If we are to keep it, a much more balanced approach would be needed, with roughly equal sections on misinformation from both sides (unless there is evidence one side produces more misinformation). Jeppiz (talk) 22:02, 14 October 2023 (UTC)

I agree with this, but ultimately this will require sourcing. Hemiauchenia (talk) 22:16, 14 October 2023 (UTC)

Here is your source: youtu.be/FhUWJrj1Wvk?si=bLHeXyx63oS9PcBf. Journalists were showed real footage of beheading and etc done by Hamas in Israel to fight with the disinformation done by Hamas and other islamists. 89.79.15.76 (talk) 09:43, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

I think we need to put a section from the main article Decapitations by Hamas here. I dont kn ow why someone put it there 182.183.0.254 (talk) 13:27, 15 October 2023 (UTC)

In the section Allegations of beheadings, there is enough evidence to cast doubt on some of the more wild and outrageous claims of human rights abuses. For while the US President said he had seen the pictures, was not the Whitehouse later forced to backtrack on the claim? Given how dodgy these claims have proven to be, should not people stop banging on about them? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.149.166.210 (talk) 11:01, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

The 40 dead baby allegations where debunked long ago - please see https://www.lemonde.fr/en/les-decodeurs/article/2024/04/03/40-beheaded-babies-the-itinerary-of-a-rumor-at-the-heart-of-the-information-battle-between-israel-and-hamas_6667274_8.html Prunesqualor billets_doux 13:45, 18 October 2024 (UTC)

Sexual assault by Hamas militants on Oct 7

In the Israel credibility section, in the paragraph about Israeli misinformation regarding sexual assaults by Hamas militants, there is no mention of that same UN report confirming that Hamas militants did indeed sexually assault Israeli women in the attack, only mention of the claims discredited by the report, which seems suggestive towards the false claim that all accusations are unfounded. 213.233.104.48 (talk) 06:51, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

The page is specifically about misinformation, and that section specifically about misinformation from Israel. Hence its content.

Also the UN report explicitly did not "confirm" that Hamas militants sexually assaulted or raped Israeli women in the attack. Patten's report, as noted in the Times of London source, was not a full and legal investigation, did not establish anything beyond a reasonable doubt, and did not attribute anything to Hamas. The later mandated and legal UN CoR report also was unable to verify allegations of Hamas rape, sexualized torture and genital mutilation, citing obstruction by Israeli authorities. All of this is noted in the relevant page devoted to this topic, unlike this one, which is focused on misinformation.

Note that we also do not include the extensive documentation of Israeli sexual violence, rape, mutilation and sexualized torture of Palestinians on the page, like after the mention of the Al Jazeera report that was misinformation. And we shouldn't, because again the page isn't about that. Raskolnikov.Rev (talk) 07:19, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

"False flag" section, and recent pieces in papers of record

The article in its present state claims that "[an] unsubstantiated conspiracy theory that emerged following the October 7 Hamas attack suggests that the Israeli government, specifically Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, had prior knowledge of the attack." This is attributed to an October 16, 2023 Forbes article and appears to be true in reference to the claims of Israeli foreknowledge that were being advanced at the time the piece was published (nine days after the attack).

In an apparent "stopped clock" phenomenon, however, there seems to have since emerged a mainstream journalistic consensus that the Israeli military/government did in fact have some intelligence of the planned attack; see The New York Times, The Jerusalem Post, etc.

The only reason I wouldn't bring this up in an edit outright (aside from lacking the permission) is that I think it requires extraordinarily careful attention to the difference between what is now known and reported in reliable secondary sources and what has been claimed without evidence by bad actors. Nonetheless I think it's important, for WP:POV reasons, that this section be updated Moonjail (talk) 00:54, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

(Technically the rule for this topic area is that editors aren't meant to participate in discussions until becoming extended confirmed, but this seems good-faith and roughly like an edit request in spirit. Please be aware of those rules going forward though.)

Somewhat agree - we should probably tweak the last paragraph, and reword or somehow qualify had prior knowledge of the attack. There was some prior knowledge, but it wasn't acted on for whatever reason. JPost mentions negligence (the Hanlon's razor explanation) as a reason; I (vaguely) recall other sources have posited other reasons more related to the quality of intelligence. It's possible that the reasons were more intentional (like a false flag or stand-down order), but I think those are still considered conspiracy theories, at least I'm not aware of reliable sources lending credence to them. A more recent source would indeed be a good addition. I'll try to follow up later when I have time to examine relevant sources. — xDanielx ^T/_C\^R 05:35, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing me to the right avenue for these requests. Moonjail (talk) 15:04, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

Very possibly they had some information pointing that way, but there's always a lot of rumour going around so it is very difficult to push something like tht to the alarm stage. For instance practically any famous person gets threats to their lives every so often and identifying a credible one can sometimes be a bit difficult. NadVolum (talk) 07:03, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

should the deaths caused by Israel's own response be added to the false flag section?

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-09-07/israel-hannibal-directive-kidnap-hamas-gaza-hostages-idf/104224430 Mrloggy (talk) 03:01, 22 September 2024 (UTC)

probably not Mrloggy (talk) 03:06, 22 September 2024 (UTC)

UN 'halve' Gaza death toll

https://www.newsweek.com/fact-check-did-un-halve-gaza-death-toll-1900325

I have seen people misinterpreting the difference between 'identified deaths' and 'overall deaths' to doubt the death toll. We should add it in the page Cherry567 (talk) 14:31, 4 October 2024 (UTC)

Disinformation

Disinformation is false information deliberately spread to deceive people.

Even if something turns out to be false we should only add it if it's characterised as disinformation in the source or if it makes it clear that there was intent to deceive. Alaexis_¿question? 22:43, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

True, but it's not even false — Preceding unsigned comment added by Falshimura (talk • contribs) 17:58, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

@Falshimura: please note that only extended confirmed users are supposed to edit in this topic area. That includes discussions like this one, with an exception for edit requests.

That said I think they have a point. As far as I know, Israel never said anything about gold in the hospital, only in a separate bunker under it. I'm not sure if Israeli even claimed there was an entrance from the hospital; at least the graphic showed entrances only from two separate buildings. Israel's claims could be false, but getting a tour of the hospital doesn't seem like a serious investigation of those claims. — xDanielx ^T/_C\^R 18:36, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

This BBC article is a reliable source. Even if its not disinformation, its misinformation. American officials have not seen any evidence, and "Israel did not provide evidence". The article also says "Fears had proliferated that hospitals would be struck in the greater Beirut area after the Israeli allegations, which echoed similar claims in Gaza, where the Israel Defense Forces said Hamas ran military operations from medical buildings." So this isn't just some harmless misinformation. Its information that could be used to justify the killing of innocent civilians.VR _{(Please ping on reply)} 16:58, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 10 December 2024

Remove or rephrase parts of the paragraph regarding Israeli government and companies deploying AI tools and bot farms to spread disinformation: Source 4 is no longer available The report mentioned in source 5 only notes STOIC, a political campaign management firm in Israel - not the government. Source 6 does not have any information to affirm what is being claimed, other than the sentence directly quoting The Intercept. 2A02:14F:1F2:12D7:0:0:BA92:6619 (talk) 21:30, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

It's better to give links to sources as their numbers may change. Which source is no longer available for you? As to STOIC, the phrase mentions both the government and private companies so I'm not sure what change is needed. Alaexis_¿question? 21:38, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Ultraodan (talk) 14:44, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

The section about advance-knowledge should be edited

Netanyahu is currently being investigated & heavily criticized within for possible foreknowledge, or intentional negligence, as well as a general corruption issue. Nicememes (talk) 00:40, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

For example, he probably knew about activation of Israeli sim cards in Gaza linked to the attack. Israeli SigInt is very good, they most likely had the capability to track movements & communications. He backdated documents & then blackmailed officials to expunge an intentional 10-15 minute delay to the response, reportedly saying to "call me back in 10 minutes." He also changed recording procedures for meetings relatively close to the attacks.

He was warned by IDF officials of an attack in the weeks leading up to it. He reportedly didn't take it seriously.

He was warned by border guards of mock runs of hostage-taking, sometimes as little as one mile from actual attack sites.

He knew of specific attack plans, although not dates or exact locations, up to 1 year prior.

Nicememes (talk) 00:47, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

@Nicememes, I think this should be added to Benjamin_Netanyahu#Sixth_term as well. Can you write the proposed text here - what exactly you'd like to add to these articles? Alaexis_¿question? 21:04, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

Nicememes (talk) 07:29, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

My reply is not showing up for some reason but I feel like the whole section needs a revision in light of the new information regarding the many, separate warnings given to the Netanyahu governmentt. Additionally, the evidence is far stronger than just Charlie Kirk's word. Saying it relies soly on his word seems misleading, when in reality there is an active discussion regarding his inplication in terms of negligence. Nicememes (talk) 07:33, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

Nicememes (talk) 07:36, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

Extend article with disinformation related to Non-governmental organization

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

There are two forms I want to focus on:

- Spreading disinformation with the help of NGOs

- Discrediting other NGOs (also with the help of other NGOs)

NGOs are one of the core sources of information regarding the Israel-Hamas war, often seen as more reliable than governments. If they can be discredited disinformation can be easier spread. But the whole article mentions NGOs not once.

One of the best examples is: NGO Monitor. It's whole purpose is to discredit other NGOs. They rank high on google search and seem legit at a first glance. But: nearly all their articles are about anti-israel NGOs. It's their focus everywhere. They even tried to edit Wikipedia: "NGO Monitor's online communications editor, Arnie Draiman, was indefinitely banned from editing Wikipedia articles about the Israeli-Arab conflict due to biased editing, concealing his place of work and using a second account in a way forbidden by Wikipedia policy." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NGO_Monitor

If I search for "israel disinformation ngos" on google the first link will actually be to NGO Monitor.

An article about Israel buying google ads to discredit UNRWA: https://www.wired.com/story/israel-unrwa-usa-hamas-google-search-ads/ Attacks against UNRAW are already in the wikipedia article.

Its very hard to find reliable information how many NGOs or fake NGOs are producing disinformation. Where to find credible sources related to this topic? Some are so obvious that they can be used as a source by themself.

Obvious disinformation NGOs:

- https://ngo-monitor.org/

If you go on their website under NGO Campaign Databases they will have a section for "Palestinian Minors involved in Terror" "2021 Gaza Conflict: Turning Terrorists into Civilians" "Mapping the anti-Israel NGO Network in the US"

- https://unwatch.org/

Headlines: "Fire UN Special Rapporteur Francesca Albanese" "Dissolve and Replace Hamas-infested UNRWA" "Terminate the U.N.'s Anti-Israel Commission of Inquiry"

https://unwatch.org/item-7/claim/claim-47-israel-is-using-starvation-as-a-weapon-of-war-in-gaza-post-october-7th/ "Israel’s conduct throughout the war to facilitate aid to Gaza goes well beyond its obligations under international law and proves the opposite of this accusation"

- NGOWatch ?

Probably Disinformation NGOs:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Defamation_League https://www.standwithus.com/

Examples of sites discrediting NGOS: https://jcpa.org/overview_palestinian_manipulation/role_of_ngos_in_the_palestinian-political_war/ https://besacenter.org/documenting-the-enablers-of-hamas-war-crimes-un-agencies-government-aid-programs-and-ngos/

Finally found a scientific article about it. It shows some of the overlapping funding and connections between some of the NGOs: https://researchportal.bath.ac.uk/en/publications/how-israel-attempts-to-mislead-the-united-nations-deconstructing-

http://policyworkinggroup.org.il/report_en.pdf

I know this is not a very comprehensive or clear write up but I just wanted to get this topic started. NaitsabesPi (talk) 23:45, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

References

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.