Independent journalists in Gaza face a dangerous double battle. Working without institutional protection or financial safety nets, they risk their lives to report the reality of war, overcoming severe resource shortages and systemic neglect to ensure the world hears the truth.

North American mainstream journalists covering US and Israel-led algorithmic warfare frequently use anthropomorphic language that humanises technologies like machine learning, forcing a reliance on tech-elite jargon that sanitises the immense human cost and removes accountability from the state actors and weapon developers.

In the following account, Amira Nassar presents a narrative filled with intricate detail, intimate exchanges, and an unyielding struggle over the meaning of writing amid slaughter and starvation. Part of The Journalism Review’s documentary project recording the testimonies of journalists in Palestine and the Gaza Strip during the ongoing genocide, it stands as a testament against oblivion and the machinery of extermination.

Can the media subject the issue of famine in Palestine to so-called professional balance even after UN agencies and the International Court of Justice have acknowledged it? Why have many Western media outlets avoided precise legal and ethical terms such as “famine” or “starvation,” opting instead for vague expressions like “food shortage” or “nutrition crisis”? Doesn’t this practice reflect a clear bias in favor of the Israeli narrative and serve to justify the policy of “systematic starvation”?

How did foreign journalists cover the killings in both Bosnia-Herzegovina and Rwanda? Did they contribute to conveying the truth and making an impact? Would the entry of foreign journalists into the Gaza Strip change the reality of the ongoing genocide? And would their coverage of the famine and massacres add to the daily coverage of local journalists? Why is the local press's coverage of wars seen as deficient compared to Western journalism, even though they incur greater losses and casualties?