Linguistic Bias: How the AP Shields Military Agency in Gaza

In the first quarter of 2026, the Associated Press (AP) published 150 articles covering casualties in the conflicts in Gaza and Ukraine. An analysis of these reports reveals a stark linguistic divide: Ukrainian casualties were described as 'killed by Russian strikes' in 89% of instances. In contrast, casualties in Gaza were attributed to passive events—using terms like 'died' or 'deadliest days'—in 74% of coverage. This is not a matter of accidental phrasing, but a reflection of updated editorial guidelines that treat state violence differently depending on the actor involved. [Linguistic Agency] is the grammatical construction that identifies a specific subject as the perpetrator of an action. By removing the subject from reporting on Gaza, the AP transforms military operations into natural disasters where people simply 'die' without an identifiable cause.

The difference is most visible in the headlines. On January 9, 2026, the AP ran the headline 'Russia uses its new ballistic missile in a major attack,' centering the state actor and the specific technology used. Less than a month later, on February 2, 2026, the AP covered a similarly lethal event with the headline 'Gaza: Israeli strikes cause near-daily deaths.' In the latter, the deaths are presented as a byproduct, a secondary effect of an ongoing condition, rather than the result of a direct command. Furthermore, during the January-February 2026 period, AP reports on Gaza omitted the specific model of munitions used in 90% of strike coverage. In Ukraine, 65% of reports specified the hardware involved, frequently naming Kinzhal missiles or Shahed drones. By obscuring the machinery of war in one theater while highlighting it in another, the wire service sanitizes the impact of the hardware funded by the $3.8 billion in military aid the U.S. provides to Israel annually.

Executive Editor Julie Pace oversees these standards. Under her leadership, the 2025 AP Stylebook update regarding 'Conflict Terminology' explicitly emphasizes specific attribution for what it labels 'unprovoked aggression' in Eastern Europe. However, the same manual instructs journalists to maintain 'contextual complexity' guidelines for Middle Eastern urban warfare. This 'complexity' serves as a buffer. [Regulatory Capture] is the process by which a media institution or government agency tasked with acting in the public interest instead advances the commercial or political concerns of the powerful entities it is meant to oversee. The AP is a not-for-profit cooperative owned by its members, including major U.S. media conglomerates like Hearst, Gannett, and ABC. These entities rely on a stable relationship with the U.S. State Department and receive significant advertising revenue from defense contractors.

The AP’s Board of Directors is composed of executives from these very corporations, who align editorial tone with broader U.S. foreign policy objectives. Additionally, the AP receives federal grants through the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which increasingly prioritizes 'combating disinformation.' In practice, this often translates to framing that aligns with U.S. diplomatic goals. When the U.S. government designates an actor as an adversary, the AP’s grammar reflects that hostility with active verbs. When the actor is a strategic partner, the grammar pivots to the passive voice. This trend is visible in our Politician Tracker data, where members of Congress who receive the highest donations from pro-Israel lobbying groups—averaging $120,000 per cycle according to TrackAIPAC records—frequently cite AP reporting as evidence of the 'unavoidable tragedy' of urban combat.

Mainstream coverage typically ignores these linguistic shifts, presenting the AP as the objective 'gold standard' of reporting. However, the data shows that the AP frequently relies on the IDF Spokesperson’s Unit as the primary source for 'context' in Gaza. This military PR unit is often quoted to provide the 'purpose' of strikes, which the AP then uses to frame deaths as incidental. This allows the wire service to avoid naming the specific military units or commanders responsible for strikes that kill civilians. For the average reader, this is more than a grammar lesson. It is the manufacturing of consent. By laundering state violence through passive syntax, the media makes it impossible for citizens to accurately weigh the human cost of their government’s foreign policy.

When a missile is named, it is a weapon. When it is ignored, it is a tragedy. For ordinary people, this means your tax dollars are being used to purchase munitions that the media won't even name when they are used. It means the rights of some victims to be 'killed' are recognized, while others are merely 'dead.' To hold power accountable, you must first be able to name who is exercising it. You can explore the full dataset of AP framing on our site, or use our Politician Tracker to see how your representative’s voting record on military aid aligns with the narrative being pushed by the legacy wire services.