A source, not the final decision maker
HonestReporting found PJS cited in 58 of 218 Gaza entries it reviewed, about 26.6%, tied with SKeyes as the most cited source. Nine entries counted in that sample were later removed. The figure therefore describes the reviewed records, not necessarily the current database. The International Federation of Journalists also says it works closely with its PJS affiliate when checking deaths.
HonestReporting linked to posts in which Abu Bakr praised Diaa Hamarsheh, who murdered five people in a 2022 shooting in Bnei Brak, and Muhammad al Jabari, who murdered an Israeli in Kiryat Arba. The watchdog argues that those statements raise serious questions about the political stance of a prominent source. They do not, by themselves, establish that every name PJS supplied was wrongly included.
Nor does supplying a name give Abu Bakr sole authority to declare someone a journalist in CPJ’s database. CPJ says it checks previous work and verifies cases with at least two sources. Its definition turns on journalism and connection to work; evidence of participation in combat can exclude a case, while political views or employment at an affiliated outlet do not automatically do so.
The revised list and the contested number
On September 24, CPJ reported the results of a review of 229 deaths documented since October 2023. It removed 22 people, reinstated six and reclassified 12 after examining new information. CPJ says an external audit found that it applied its established methodology. It maintains that Israeli forces account for by far the majority of journalist and media worker killings worldwide since 2023.
In a separate, updated audit, HonestReporting says 102 of the 191 Gaza entries remaining on the list it examined, roughly 53%, have ties to terrorist groups. Its umbrella category includes people who worked for outlets affiliated with such groups. It must not be read as a finding that 102 people were combatants. CPJ also cautions that removing an entry does not mean a killing was lawful. The two organizations dispute the boundaries of the count, and the evidence behind individual entries deserves examination rather than a single sweeping label.
