This book taught me not to make assumptions.
I picked this book because, frankly, I felt like hitting my head against a brick wall. Stand with Israel! Stand with Palestine! October 7th never happened! The deaths in Gaza never happened! Zionism is evil! Zionism is brilliant! The land belongs to Israelis! The land belongs to Palestinians!
I have never been so utterly fed up of humanity as I have been in the reporting of this war.
And so I was desperately scanning the Internet for somebody who felt the same way as me: not pro-Palestine or pro-Israel, but pro-humanity on both sides. I came across an article from Trey Yingst that I found compassionate and objective, and then discovered he'd written a book.
But...oh, no. Yingst works for Fox News.
Still, it had good reviews, and I was impressed with Yingst's article. So, with some trepidation, I purchased the book.
I got through it in one night.
I was already well-informed of what occurred on October 7th, and so some of those parts I did skim--either because I knew the information, or because it was too upsetting for me to read again. However, I found Yingst's reporting of it to bring into vivid clarity the horror of it. I was pleased that he remained objective throughout: by acknowledging that, yes, the initial reports of 40 beheaded babies were untrue--but this doesn't mean it didn't happen *at all*.
Having read a book on how Sandy Hook conspiracy theories came to be, I'm sad to say that I see the same rhetoric that was used in Sandy Hook now be picked up by the left-wing in order to deny October 7th. In both Sandy Hook and October 7th, some details were incorrect, some, shall we say, exaggerated. In both cases, conspiracy theorists took these exaggerations and used them as a way to insist that not only did the exaggerations not happen, but *nothing* happened.
In both cases, these exaggerations were not malicious: they were the natural consequence of fast-moving situations. Both Sandy Hook and October 7th were so beyond the realm of what human beings can process that even first responders were struggling to keep themselves together. Emotions are heightened; details are lost or accidentally fabricated when information is passed along to multiple people; traumatised first responders may make mistakes in what they are seeing. I am extremely pleased Yingst set the record straight: that some initial reports on October 7th were incorrect; this does not mean it didn't happen at all.
The fact that the left--the political people who once scorned Sandy Hook conspiracies--have become the conspiracy theorists, using the same justifications, reasoning, and excuses--is sad and baffling to witness. But that is a discussion for another day.*
I also picked up this book looking for more information about what the people of Gaza are suffering. As Yingst cannot enter Gaza of his own accord, the book is more tailored to Israeli perspectives, simply because these are the people Yingst is more available to interview. However, what he did report on Gaza, I found to again be compassionate and objective.
Firstly, I liked how Yingst immediately tore apart the narrative that everyone in Palestine supports Hamas. Considering how many Hamas-controversies UNWRA now has to its name, I tensed up when one of Yingst's first Gazan perspectives was from a UNWRA member--but that was, again, me making assumptions. The UNWRA member came across as a perfectly normal person who was saddened about both October 7th and the following bombardment of Gaza. I took this as a reminder not to clump people together in one group, whether it be Palestine, Gaza, or UNWRA itself.
I found the explanations and stories of how Gazan parents struggled to keep their children safe to be difficult. Do they leave with their child(ren) to a border? Do they stay in the house? I cannot imagine making these decisions for my own safety, let alone the safety of your children. Yingst states a few times the Palestinians are living in hell on earth, and it is true. To be cooped into a small patch of land, constantly moving from place to place--that is a nightmare I hope nobody else has to experience.
My favourite part of the book was Yingst stating that he is not Pro-Palestine; he is not Pro-Israel; he is pro-truth. This was made clear when he held off on reporting Israel supposedly bombing a hospital, killing hundreds; and he was correct to be sceptical. At the time of this review, it seems likely the blast was caused by a Hamas rocket landing in the hospital's car park. Of course, this may change with later investigations--Israel may have bombed that hospital after all--but the point is the details surrounding it were too blurry and too many things didn't add up. And so Yingst held back. Unfortunately, many other news sites did not--they ran with it, leading to even further confusion, anger, and distress.
Yingst was correct in his belief that reporters, especially war reporters, have a unique responsibility to take care over their words. They cannot report things unless they are 100% sure it's the truth; if they are not 100% sure, they need to make this clear to their audiences that their report may be incorrect.
And herein lies my lesson on assumptions. I consider myself to be on the left politically (although damn, have they been doing my head in for the past year--actually, leftists often do my head in. I often feel like I'm the character in a film being dragged to the dinner with relatives you hate but feel obliged to get on with due to the fact you're family. Smile, nod politely, and bitch about them as soon as you're back home). Regardless, a reporter for Fox News--scorned and mocked by many of the left-wing--has managed to have more compassion in his little finger than many of the leftist journalists and activists I have seen. He has managed to grasp A) what his job is (don't blatantly lie to your audience to craft a narrative); B) that nobody in this situation has chosen it (yes, even the Israelis and Palestinians you dislike); and C) every innocent life lost is a tragedy (yes, regardless of whose land it actually belongs to).
Am I now a Fox News convert? Haha--no. But it has certainly opened my mind, and having your mind opened is always a good thing. Yes, even if it's to the news channel that's the opposite of your political beliefs.
I would like to thank Trey Yingst for writing this book, and I echo other reviewers in hoping he gets some sort of formal recognition for his bravery in reporting this war.
*For anyone interested, the book is Sandy Hook: An American Tragedy and the Battle for Truth. Aside from being informative on Sandy Hook in general, it really allowed me to understand how conspiracy theorists think. October 7th is too recent for full-on psychological investigations into how its deniers and justifiers operate, and so this book is the next best way to understand what the hell they're on about. Whenever I feel angry about the way people justify or deny October 7th, it helps me to think of what I learnt in this book--and I find that my anger melts away. Instead, I just feel pity for them.