PROLOGUE
Why I Correct Headlines
In May 2021, I was reading the news on my phone when a headline stopped me, not because it shocked me, but because it carried the familiar tone that Western media outlets have perfected in constructing their narrative of Palestine. The article was about Palestinians being forced out of their homes in East Jerusalem. I remember pausing, then rereading the headline and subhead to take in the careful linguistic choices and the essential information that was missing. As a historian of the region, I was not surprised to see the way the media reflected the official account of their country's foreign policy positions.
The headline used the word "evictions," which suggested paperwork, municipal procedure, and real estate disputes. It did not say that East Jerusalem is recognized under international law as occupied Palestinian territory and that these expulsions were just another episode in a long history of forced displacement and land theft. This history was not denied outright, but it was laundered to erase Israeli violence and Palestinian victimhood. The language was softened enough to dull its meaning, referring to "contested neighborhoods" instead of "occupation," saying "to remove" rather than "to ethnically cleanse." These word choices were no accident.
I found myself mentally rewriting it, inserting the missing context, restoring the agency and violation that had been carefully edited out. What would happen, I wondered, if the headline actually said what was happening? If it distinguished the occupier and the occupied? So, I decided to make those changes. I took a screenshot, crossed out the problematic language, made my edits in red, and posted it. I did not expect a strong reaction. But as the post gained traction and the image spread, I realized it could do more than correct headlines. It offered a way to expose how reality itself had been slanted to fit our political ecosystem.
