Imad Ghanem happens to be Palestinian cameraman who works for a Palestinian TV station that is connected to Hamas. He was covering the Al Burieg refugee camp in Gaza city during the Israeli offensive at the place. He was severely wounded, and eventually lost his legs. Israeli tanks fired at him while he was on the ground. The IDF also opened fire at some Reuters staff. Fellow press people accuse the Israeli forces for killing anyone on sight, unmindful that the man was carrying a camera and not a firearm. Would invading forces even have the time to bother to look and discern? Also, would the people manning the tank that fired even know that he was working for a Hamas-affiliated TV station?

Journalists know that covering conflict areas, especially at the height of an offensive, is gravely perilous. They can proceed to do that but at their extreme risk. They cannot expect military forces to proceed with extreme caution for fear that they might kill journalists. In the first place, and as far as invading military forces in a war are concerned, journalists should not even be there in the line of fire. There might be an international law that protects journalists in war zones, but in a war, fighting is primordial, not press coverage.

It would help that journalists have a certain insignia on them, announcing loud and clear that they belong to the international press, much like the big and bold red sign of the Red Cross. Otherwise, without any immediately visible form of identification, they can be mistaken as enemy. Or better yet, they should proceed with extreme caution, thinking first about their safety and security before trying to finish the story. Best, they should not get too near where they should not be in the first place. After all, it is their life at stake and it is just a story for their media company to sell.

Via IMEMC