IMAGINE a place reduced to rubble, with dead bodies rotting on the ground and life becoming a daily misery for those who survive.
This is not a post-apocalyptic scene rather it is the grim reality of Palestine.
These unbearable conditions began to unfold after Israel launched an indiscriminate, illegal, and irrational war against Gaza.
As time passes, the atrocities committed by Israel become increasingly severe, with a sense of madness seemingly prevailing within the Knesset.
Under Netanyahu’s regime, there appears to be no optimistic future in sight for the people of Gaza.
However, the violence unfolding in Gaza is not confined to the region.
It reverberates far beyond its borders — emotionally, politically, and psychologically.
One of the most alarming consequences has been the wave of radicalization among Muslim youth, fuelled by media sensationalism and the algorithmic amplification of suffering.
This radicalization is not born in a vacuum; it is the result of predictable psychological responses to repeated trauma, identity threat, and perceived injustice.
There is a robust psychological anthropological and sociological scholarship that suggests that the media coverage and images depicting the sufferings of one’s identity fellows can accelerate the radicalization amongst the members of the group.
There are several theories that explain this process.
For example, Social Identity Theory highlights that people identify themselves with the respective social groups they belong to.
When those groups are targeted or victimized, in-group cohesion intensifies and animosity toward perceived out-groups can increase as is witnessed during the recent Indo-Pak standoff in which radical Indian goons were seen chanting for complete annihilation of Pakistan.
Similarly, Collective trauma and moral emotions such as anger, grief, and humiliation play a central role.
When youth are exposed to graphic imagery and feel politically powerless to stop the violence as in the case of Palestine, they are more likely to interpret suffering through the lens of moral outrage — a known driver of extremist behaviour.
Moreover, Theory of Moral Disengagement suggests that how violence may no longer be seen as a moral deviance rather be viewed as self-defence or in worst case scenario it may be viewed as necessary evil.
Additionally, Radicalization Models like Staircase to Terrorism describe how perceived injustice, aggravated by constant media reminders compel some individuals to commit terrorist activities in the name of retributive justice.
The mix of personal identity, visual proof, and emotional urgency forms a combustible psychological triad driving radicalization.
In the above-mentioned context, media plays a dual role.
On one hand, it acts as a human right bastion by championing the ideas of peace.
In this pertain, the media outlets document human rights violations to pressure global actors to act for the cessation of hostilities by mobilizing the popular discontent towards war and injustice.
On the other hand, when media coverage is overly sensational, decontextualized, and algorithmically repeated without reflection, it can deepen trauma, accelerate radicalization, and reinforce “us versus them” mantra by creating echo chambers.
Furthermore, the failure of Western leadership to take a clear moral stance against grave human rights violations and in some cases by directly siding with the aggressor (Israel), the mass atrocities that the Gazan are witnessing on daily basis have exacerbated exponentially, thereby deepening the crisis.
This idea reinforces the perception that the West is complicit in the destruction of Gaza, intensifying Muslim youth’s feelings of betrayal, marginalization, and moral urgency to avenge the blood of innocent Palestinians.
Therefore, to prevent further radicalization, a paradigm shift in media strategy is essential.
The goal is not to hide suffering, but to frame it in a way that fosters empathy, not extremism.
This is supported by foundational media and communication theories.
Framing Theory by Goffman and Entman emphasizes how the presentation of information shapes perception and behavior.
If Palestinian suffering is consistently framed through helpless victimhood and Western indifference, it reinforces alienation.
But if portrayed as part of a broader human struggle for dignity and justice, it fosters connection.
Highlighting voices of solidarity — such as Western academics, Jewish anti-occupation activists, and student advocates — challenges the binary view that all Westerners are hostile.
This undermines radical civilizational narratives.
Social Learning Theory (Bandura) also supports this: when youth observe peaceful, ethical resistance that is positively framed, they are more likely to internalize those behaviors.
Additionally, Cultivation Theory by Gerbner warns that repeated exposure to one-sided trauma imagery may lead youth to view violence as normal or inevitable.
Media platforms must therefore de-incentivize the algorithmic repetition of suffering and promote balanced, context-rich, solution-oriented content.
Ultimately, how media frames suffering matters.
When people feel their pain is acknowledged — especially by those outside their group — it disrupts extremist narratives.
Media has not only a journalistic but a moral responsibility: to tell the truth in ways that inform and heal, not divide and inflame.
By projecting narratives of empathy, solidarity, and justice, media can bridge alienated Muslim youth with the global community — fostering critical thinking over blind reaction, compassion over vengeance, and unity over fear.
Otherwise, Gaza’s suffering will not end with a ceasefire.
It will echo in a generation that saw silence — and responded with fury.
The writer is a contributing columnist. ([email protected])
