The U.S. government considers Hamas a terrorist group, but VOA, which is U.S.-funded, won’t call it one.
The U.S. government considers Hamas a terrorist group, but VOA, which is U.S.-funded, won’t call it one.
V oice of America’s management has told staff of the U.S.-government-funded but editorially independent global news outlet not to call Hamas and its members terrorists, except when quoting statements, National Review has learned. VOA’s guidance also prompted some pushback from a reporter who urged a more extensive explanation of Hamas’s motives in the October 7 terrorist attacks.
In an email sent on Friday to the news service’s employees, VOA associate editor for news standards Carol Guensburg relayed the outlet’s policy for covering the October 7 terrorist attacks and the ensuing Israeli campaign against Hamas targets. She emphasized that VOA needs to maintain neutrality in its coverage and that its reporters should “be especially careful with word choice in dealing with a conflict.”
Reporters and editors for the outlet may call Hamas’s slaughter of civilians on October 7 terrorist attacks or acts of terror, according to VOA guidance, which initially went out to staff on October 10. But VOA staff were instructed to “avoid calling Hamas and its members terrorists, except in quotes,” according to emails obtained by NR.
“This practice conforms with the VOA News Standards and Best Practices guide and current usage by the wires and major U.S. news organizations, bearing in mind that the language including terrorism is often used to demonize individuals and groups with whom the speaker disagrees. Useful alternatives are militant group or militants or fighters,” stated the guidance that Guensburg highlighted. “In this case, it would be the Hamas militant group or Hamas militants.”
This refers to similar guidance issued by newswire services such as the Associated Press. While VOA’s guidance loosely resembles the AP’s order not to refer to terrorism, the AP goes even further, prohibiting the use of the word terrorism for the October 7 slaughter of civilians.
The VOA guidance also states: “Although we will report on the actions of terrorists, VOA SHOULD NOT BE USED AS A PLATFORM TO SPREAD THEIR MESSAGES.”
The U.S. and several of its allies have formally designated Hamas as a terrorist group, and President Biden has repeatedly called Hamas terrorists following the October 7 terrorist attack, in which Hamas slaughtered more than 1,400 people.
Although VOA is funded by the U.S. government, it takes pride in an independence that differentiates it from state-controlled outlets run by authoritarian regimes. VOA is guided by a “firewall” policy that insulates its editorial decisions from direction by U.S. political leaders, and its mission statement emphasizes that its work will be “accurate, objective, and comprehensive.”
Yet the outlet has at times run afoul of critics in Washington who worry that VOA’s reporting has strayed from objectivity, into a line that is biased against American foreign-policy aims, and that it has failed to appropriately vet its foreign reporters. Last year, a decision to hire two individuals who previously worked for Russian propaganda arms for VOA’s Russian-language service sparked internal controversy, leading to the dismissal of one of the two staffers.
In response to questions from NR about the outlet’s approach to covering Hamas, VOA spokeswoman Emily Webb stressed the outlet’s objectivity. “In adherence with our Charter, Voice of America must remain ‘accurate, objective and comprehensive’ in its reporting. If a VOA journalist is seen as favoring one side or another, that can erode audience trust in our coverage,” she said.
Guensburg’s message was delivered to an email list that includes around 1,300 of VOA’s reporters and editors, prompting some disagreement. One of the news service’s most prominent reporters urged her colleagues to explain Hamas’s conduct as the result of Israeli actions.
“I would also add the importance of mentioning victims from both sides and giving historical context that the conflict did not start on Oct. 7,” replied Patsy Widakuswara, VOA’s White House bureau chief. She suggested language that would note that Israeli air strikes have killed 4,000 people in Gaza, which were “in response to Hamas’ incursion on October 7th that killed 1,400 people in Israel and took 200 captive.” Her example language also noted that “the militant group’s attack was done in retaliation for Israel’s decades-long occupation.”
A senior VOA editor responded to Widakuswara urging caution about attributing motivation to Hamas’s attack: “We don’t really know why they did it. Better to say it follows Israel’s decades-long occupation.”
Widakuswara replied: “We can do that. Per Hamas the aim of the attack was ‘to free Palestinian prisoners, stop Israeli aggression on Al-Aqsa Mosque, and to break the siege on Gaza.’”
Subsequent messages from other VOA staffers pushed back against Widakuswara’s comments, suggesting that her proposed language minimizes terrorism or justifies Hamas’s conduct. Widakuswara referred NR to VOA’s PR team.