Ynet News (English)

Where the score comes from

Each technique the reading found, as a share of its articles. Tap one to read the passages.

• Leaves out what changes the pictureThe article leaves out a fact about the event it reports, which the outlet had or other outlets reported about the same event, and without it a reader believes something false about that event. Background the article is not about (overall tolls, the wider crisis) is not this technique.64%9 of 14
• One side gets the spaceOne side's voices fill the article when the story concerns both, and the other side appears only as numbers or not at all.57%8 of 14
• Hedges the documented recordThe genocide in Gaza, the ICJ's findings, the ICC's warrants or the illegality of the occupation and the settlements are written as allegation, as disputed, or not at all where the article turns on them. In an opinion piece, a direct denial of the record is a false_claim citing the record, not this technique.43%6 of 14
• Uses the occupation's wordsDisputed territory, Judea and Samaria, a neighbourhood for a settlement, evacuated for expelled, a security operation for a raid, in the outlet's own voice.36%5 of 14
• Labels people on one side's wordIn its own voice the outlet calls people who were killed, detained or attacked terrorists, militants, gunmen or rioters, and its only basis is a party's claim.29%4 of 14
• States one side's claim as factA party's contested claim is written in the outlet's own voice with no attribution, so the reader takes it as established.21%3 of 14
• Softens settler violenceSettler attacks are called clashes or tensions, or the part Israeli soldiers played is left out.14%2 of 14
• Tells the event as something elseThe article tells the event as a different kind of story: a blockade by masked men as travel disruption, a killing as a security incident, a protest against racism as a clash between two sides.14%2 of 14
• Uses a loaded wordA word in the outlet's own voice that carries a verdict the facts in the article do not.14%2 of 14
• Other techniquesWays of misleading the reading found that our list does not name yet. Each one is named in plain words on its article's page.14%2 of 14
• Gives a contested claim the last wordA party's claim ends a passage or the article with nothing against it, when the article itself, the coverage or the record shows it is contested.7%1 of 14
• Headline goes beyond the articleThe headline states what the body does not support, drops the attribution the body gives, or puts in quotation marks words nobody in the article said.7%1 of 14
• Smears a named personA grave allegation against a named person or organisation (terrorism, extremism, antisemitism, fraud, violence) with nothing in the article to back it.7%1 of 14
• Writes the death outA killing or a death is written in words that hide it: eliminated, neutralised, removed a threat, lost their lives, died for were killed, a toll with no word for killing in it.7%1 of 14

Its most framed articles

From the last 90 days. Open one to read it with every flagged sentence marked.

1. 9.1IDF and Shin Bet launch counterterrorism operation in Hebron ...Ynet tells its readers about an Israeli military operation in Hebron entirely in the army's vocabulary: it calls the two Palestinian men who shot at soldiers "terrorists" in its own voice, places the shooting in "Judea" rather than the occupied West Bank, and relays an IOF statement about residents being "able to exit" as the last and only word on what the operation means for the city.
2. 8.8Hebron shooting kills 2; IDF probes AFP photographer's presenceYnet runs an unsourced suggestion that an AFP photographer knew of the attack in advance, and its headline turns that expectation into a probe already under way.
3. 8.2Israel fears copycat attacks ahead of election after deadly West Bank terror shootingYnet tells the Hebron operation almost entirely in the Israeli military's words.
4. 7.3Four wounded in shooting attack near Hebron, terrorists eliminated after pursuitYnet's headline writes the killing of the two attackers as "eliminated", and the outlet labels them "terrorists" in its own voice with no attribution.