Inside Reuters: 'Our coverage silences Palestinian suffering'

Several employees of the UK-based news agency Reuters spoke out in a report released on Thursday about what they see as pro-Israel bias among the company’s editors and management.

Earlier this month, following Israel’s assassination of Palestinian journalist Anas Al Sharif, Reuters published a headline stating, "Israel kills Al Jazeera journalist it says was Hamas leader."

The choice of such a contentious headline stirred controversy, especially since Al Sharif was formerly part of Reuters' Pulitzer Prize-winning team in 2024, the Declassified UK reported.

The headline triggered backlash online and sparked unease among Reuters employees, some of whom have privately voiced concerns about what they describe as a pro-Israel slant in the news agency’s editorial decisions.

Reuters, founded in London in 1851 and now reaching over a billion people daily, faces growing scrutiny from within.

Several current and former Reuters staff, speaking anonymously to Declassified UK, described an editorial culture that downplays Palestinian suffering.

A significant bias

One desk editor resigned in August 2024, stating that their values no longer aligned with the company’s approach to covering Israel’s war in Gaza.

The editor attached a report and an open letter, urging management to adhere to core journalistic principles; however, Reuters’ communications department denies ever receiving them.

However, insiders confirmed to Declassified UK that following Israel’s war on Gaza, a group of Reuters journalists conducted an internal review of nearly 500 Israel-Palestine stories published over five weeks.

Their findings revealed a significant bias, as far more resources and attention were devoted to Israeli perspectives and casualties, despite the far heavier death toll among Palestinians in Gaza.

At that time, over 11,000 Palestinians had been killed, roughly ten times the number of Israeli fatalities.

“A comprehensive internal investigation, conducting both quantitative and qualitative analyses of our reporting”, took place, according to a Reuters source, which told Declassified UK: