In this study, we aimed to identify biased language in a dataset provided by the FIGNEWS 2024 committee on the Gaza-Israel war. We classified entries into seven categories: Unbiased, Biased against Palestine, Biased against Israel, Biased against Others, Biased against both Palestine and Israel, Unclear, and Not Applicable. Our team reviewed the literature to develop a codebook of terminologies and definitions. By coding each example, we sought to detect language tendencies used by media outlets when reporting on the same event. The primary finding was that most examples were classified as “Biased against Palestine,” as all examined language data used one-sided terms to describe the October 7 event. The least used category was “Not Applicable,” reserved for irrelevant examples or those lacking context. It is recommended to use neutral and balanced language when reporting volatile political news.

This paper is a part of the FIGNEWS 2024 Datathon Shared Task and it aims to investigate bias and double standards in media coverage of the Gaza-Israel 2023-2024 conflict through a comprehensive analysis of news articles. The methodology integrated both manual labeling as well as the application of a natural language processing (NLP) tool, which is the Facebook/BART-large-MNLI model. The annotation process involved categorizing the dataset based on identified biases, following a set of guidelines in which categories of bias were defined by the team. The findings revealed that most of the media texts provided for analysis included bias against Palestine, whether it was through the use of biased vocabulary or even tone. It was also found that texts written in Hebrew contained the most bias against Palestine. In addition, when comparing annotations done by AAI-1 and AAI-2, the results turned out to be very similar, which might be mainly due to the clear annotation guidelines set by the annotators themselves. Thus, we recommend the use of clear guidelines to facilitate the process of annotation by future researchers.