Social media and smartphones have granted us infinite accessibility. Finding information on any imaginable topic only requires the click of a button; broadcasting your life is as easy as tapping a screen. In an era where anyone’s thoughts on anything can echo around the globe almost instantaneously, it’s easy to wonder: Does journalism need to exist anymore?

The Israel-Hamas war has answered that question with a definitive yes.

After Hamas’s attack on Israel on Oct. 7, social media platforms were immediately flooded with content that ranged in truthfulness. Influential figures began reposting images and videos to their Instagram stories, some of which were overtly inaccurate. For example, Justin Bieber shared an image of a demolished Palestinian neighborhood captioned “Pray for Israel.” In a similar vein, the Israeli government disseminated claims of babies being beheaded by Hamas, among other crimes that could not be verified. Tunisian journalist Muhammad al-Hachimi al-Hamidi posted an AI-generated image of Palestinian children smiling while covered in ash on X (formerly Twitter). al-Hachimi al-Hamidi didn’t acknowledge that the photo was AI generated. The image didn’t appear in any media outlets.

Misinformation can be — and usually is — more subtle than an inaccurate caption or a fake image. A lack of appropriate background information or even a careless word choice can convey false ideas. Journalists are responsible for impartial and accurate communication. In order to execute this, we have to consider the implications of language. What’s the impact of addressing the “Israel-Gaza war” instead of the “Israel-Hamas conflict?”

Within each article, podcast, social media post, or other communication, there is a difference in the usage of wording and numbers to identify the factors within the current crisis. Most contentiously, the U.S., Israel, and other countries label Hamas as a terrorist organization while other countries and publications have referred to it differently.