Were a majority of the Gazan journalists killed since October 7th, 2023 linked to terrorist organizations?

I'll investigate this by searching for data on Gazan journalists killed since October 7, 2023, and any reported affiliations with terrorist groups.I am reviewing the primary study and contrasting sources for balance.Yes, according to a detailed study by the Meir Amit Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center (ITIC), a majority—roughly 60%—of individuals identified as Gazan journalists or media workers killed since October 7, 2023, had links to terrorist organizations (primarily Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad).[1]

The December 2025 ITIC study (updating an earlier February 2024 analysis) examined 266 people listed as journalists/media personnel killed in Gaza between October 7, 2023, and November 30, 2025. These names largely came from the Hamas-run Government Media Office in Gaza (which reported ~256) plus Palestinian media reports; international groups like CPJ/RSF/IFJ have cited lower but still high figures in the 220 range for media workers. Of the 266, at least 157 (~60%) were members of or clearly affiliated with terror groups: 104 linked to Hamas (including at least 47 as members/military operatives) and 45 to PIJ (including at least 18 confirmed operatives/members). Smaller numbers were tied to other groups like Fatah’s Al-Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigades, PFLP, DFLP, or Popular Resistance Committees. The remaining ~109 included some Fatah/PA affiliates or those with no identified terror ties.[2]

Key Elements of the Findings and Methodology

This aligns with earlier ITIC findings (e.g., ~55-60% of the first ~80-130 names) and independent reviews. Analyses of CPJ lists (which draw heavily from Hamas-sourced names) have found high rates of terror-outlet employment or other ties (e.g., one early review of a CPJ subset found ~50% worked for proscribed groups).[4]

Context from Press Watchdogs and Counterpoints

CPJ, RSF, and similar groups have documented Gaza as the deadliest conflict for journalists in decades, with Israel responsible for the large majority of deaths (their tallies have ranged from ~100+ early on to 190–220+ later). They emphasize that journalists are civilians under international humanitarian law (IHL) unless directly participating in hostilities, and they criticize Israel for alleged targeting, restricted access for foreign press, and “smears.” RSF has called some accusations part of a strategy to legitimize attacks.[5]

However, CPJ has repeatedly revised its database downward: it removed dozens of names (net ~36 in one major 2026 review/audit, including ~27 for combat participation or militant-wing membership) after Hamas/PIJ obituaries and other evidence emerged identifying them as fighters. CPJ states it excludes those actively in combat or military arms but may retain those with affiliations if they were functioning as civilian journalists at the time (affiliation alone does not strip protected status under IHL). Some external audits of remaining CPJ names still claim significant residual ties.[6]

Critics of the ITIC study note it is produced by an Israeli intelligence-linked center (with current/former IDF ties), so it may apply a broad definition of “affiliated” (e.g., working for a Hamas outlet) and lacks fully independent international verification. Access restrictions limit on-the-ground checks. Not every “link” equates to active combatant status or legitimate targeting—propaganda roles differ from fighting—and some deaths occur in broader strikes amid dense urban fighting where Hamas embeds among civilians/infrastructure.

Bottom Line

The most systematic examination of the names (drawn from the primary Palestinian/Hamas lists) finds a clear majority with organizational, employment, or operational links to designated terrorist groups. This is corroborated in part by the groups’ own later admissions of some as fighters and by CPJ’s removals. Dual-use media/military roles are a documented pattern in Gaza, which complicates distinctions under the laws of war and contributes to risks for genuine press. Claims of purely independent journalists being systematically targeted as such remain contested, with evidence pointing more to a mix of collateral damage, dual-role individuals, and the challenges of fighting an embedded adversary. Figures and classifications continue to be updated as more information (e.g., from seized docs or obituaries) surfaces.