The Australian slapped for ‘black-hearted Arabs’ article

Nathan Jolly

September 3, 2025 3:30

The Press Council has ruled an opinion piece published in The Australian in January that used the terms “gorillas of Gaza” and “black-hearted Arabs” has breached its standards of practice.

The opinion piece by Alan Howe was published in News Corp masthead The Australian on January 17, titled ‘Palestinians are complicit in the horror of Hamas’. It commented on Israel’s youngest hostage Kfir Bibas and the extent of Gaza’s civilian population’s support for Hamas.

The introduction reads: “Kfir Bibas was just 262 days old when the gorillas of Gaza called. If he has been kept alive by these black-hearted Arabs, then God help him. If he has been murdered by Gazans, then God help them.”

The article was ruled to be in breach of ‘General Principle 6’ in the Standards of Practice, which states publications must take reasonable steps to “avoid causing or contributing materially to substantial offence, distress or prejudice”.

The Press Council highlights a section in the piece about the murder of Shani Louk, that said: “The world was revolted by the scenes of celebrating young Arabs parading her body through city streets on the back of a truck shouting ‘Alluha Akbar’(God is great)” and another section where Howe writes, “there is so much more that condemns Gazans, not just its Hamas-trained terrorists.”

The offending article.

Complaints to the Press Council raised concerns “that the term ‘gorillas of Gaza’ perpetuates a harmful stereotype that has historically been used to portray entire groups of people as savage or subhuman” and the use of this term as well as ‘black-hearted Arabs’ suggests that “all Arabs and all Gazans are collectively responsible for the actions of Hamas.”

The Australian argued that the language used in the article “reflects the anger, grief and horror felt by many at the grotesque nature of the October 7 attacks and the ongoing plight of those still held hostage.”

It argued further the terms are “clearly referring to the Hamas perpetrators of these atrocities, not to all Palestinians or Arabs. The text does not refer to all people in Gaza as ‘gorillas’ or all Arabs as ‘black-hearted.’” and that to suggest otherwise “was never the intention of the opinion article’s author”.

The Australian explained the language at play. “The phrase ‘gorillas of Gaza’ is a pointed play on words, referring to Hamas as guerrilla fighters who carried out the October 7 atrocities. Any reasonable reader would understand that this is a critique of the perpetrators of specific crimes and not a blanket characterisation of an ethnic group or entire population. The reference to ‘black-hearted Arabs’ is similarly directed at those responsible for or complicit in the abduction and possible murder of a child. The term ‘black-hearted’ is a widely accepted idiom denoting cruelty or evil intent.”

The Press Council recognised the article is clearly marked ‘opinion’ and therefore “entitled to use robust language and to express views to which some or even many may disagree.”

However, it ruled the print headline, “Palestinians are complicit in the horror of Hamas” and various comments in the article “in conjunction with the repeated and prominent references throughout the article to ‘Gazans’ … imply that they are collectively responsible for the October 7 atrocities and the fate of the hostages.”

The Council ruled a reasonable reader would consider the terms “gorillas of Gaza” and “black hearted Arabs” are “not solely directed at Hamas, but to all Gazans.”

It warned: “In a period of heightened community sensitivity around the Israel/Palestine conflict, great care must be taken to avoid comments that characterise an entire population or ethnic group in terms that are potentially offensive or prejudicial, and which are not justified in the public interest.”