Hamas
Date Range
Score Range
Hamas framed as untrustworthy and rearming in bad faith
[vague_attribution]: Reliance on anonymous Israeli officials to claim Hamas is 'tightening its grip' and rearming, without independent verification or Hamas response, frames the group negatively on integrity grounds.
“four Israeli defence officials have told Reuters that the military had warned Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's government in recent weeks that Hamas has been tightening its grip, rebuilding its forces and making weapons.”
Hamas is framed as under military threat from Israel
The article repeatedly references Israeli strikes targeting Hamas, its fighters, and affiliated police forces, emphasizing military pressure without reciprocal portrayal of offensive actions. This creates a framing of Hamas as a group under siege rather than an active belligerent.
“Since the pause in the war in Iran, several of Israel’s strikes in Gaza have targeted positions held by the Hamas-run police force.”
Hamas framed as initiator of conflict, justifying Israeli response
The article attributes the start of the Gaza war solely to the Hamas-led attack on 7 October 2023, presenting it as the causal event without contextualizing broader conditions. This framing legitimizes Israel’s military campaign as reactive and defensive.
“The Gaza war was triggered by the Hamas-led attack on southern Israel on 7 October 2023, when about 1,200 people were killed and 251 others were taken hostage.”
Hamas is framed as a hostile, evil adversary with no legitimacy
The article uses dehumanizing language and moral absolutism to portray Hamas as pure evil, equating support for Palestinian resistance with endorsing atrocities. This framing goes beyond reporting on actions to demonizing the entire group ideologically.
“Hamas are not heroes. There are no winners here. But at least know evil when you see it. And what happened on October 7 was its purest and most ruthless incarnation.”
Hamas is framed as a hostile, predatory force using sexual violence as a weapon of terror
The article attributes the characterization of 'weaponization of sexual violence' to the report, reinforcing a frame of Hamas as deliberately inflicting extreme harm. Graphic descriptions and repeated emphasis on systematic abuse amplify this adversarial portrayal.
“It describes the attacks as 'the weaponization of sexual violence'.”
Hamas is framed as fundamentally untrustworthy and engaged in cover-ups
The article highlights Hamas' repeated denials of sexual violence despite mounting evidence, positioning them as dishonest actors.
“Hamas has repeatedly denied sexual and gender-based violence took place during the attacks or against those held captive.”
Hamas portrayed as an inherently destructive and evil force
The report's findings are presented without counter-narrative or skepticism, depicting Hamas’s actions as universally harmful and morally indefensible, with extreme acts of sexual torture and coercion highlighted.
“Acts of sexual torture, humiliation, and coercion were used to dominate, punish, and dehumanize the hostages, often in the presence of others, amplifying their suffering and fear.”
Hamas portrayed as fundamentally untrustworthy and morally corrupt through systematic sexual violence
[cherry_picking], [narrative_framing]
“The report is separate to the formal criminal inquiry being run by the Israeli government and carries no legal weight.”
Hamas portrayed as corrupt and untrustworthy
The report and its findings are presented as credible and corroborated by international bodies like the UN and ICC, which lends legitimacy to the claim that Hamas committed systematic sexual violence, thereby undermining its moral or political standing.
“The United Nations says it has found “ reasonable grounds ” to believe that Hamas militants committed rape and other sexual violence during their rampage. The prosecutor for the International Criminal Court, Karim Khan, has said he had reason to believe that three key Hamas leaders bore responsibility for “rape and other acts of sexual violence as crimes against humanity.””
Framing Hamas as an unequivocal adversary responsible for extreme atrocities
The repeated use of charged terms like 'October 7 Massacre' in quoted legislative titles and the listing of offenses (murder, sexual violence, abduction) without counter-narrative or context frames Hamas in the most hostile possible light, reinforcing its role as a primary antagonist.
“Prosecution law for the October 7 Massacre”