Hamas’s Hostage Videos as a Tool of Strategic Communication

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This is an interesting and timely article that examines how Hamas has used hostage videos. For scholars interested in strategic communication, this article adds some valuable details about a timely and important case, though I think the paper could highlight better the broader contribution it makes. The paper mentions that previous studies have shown how terrorist groups can use hostage videos for psychological warfare, negotiations, recruitment or media attention. In the conclusion, the paper suggests that this study contributes by showing how Hamas varies the structure and emotional tone of videos, but I would have liked to hear whether this case identifies any new objectives or tells us something new not about the content, but about the overarching goals or use of strategic communication. The emphasis in the discussion seems to be on the type of messaging, whereas I would have liked to have a clearer categorization of the objectives.

The article also has the potential of speaking to a broader audience interested in terrorism, but in order to do so, it could benefit from extending the discussion a bit. In terrorism studies, for instance, a lot of scholars talk about violence as a form of costly signaling, so I would love to hear more about the relationship between strategic communication and behavior/tactics. This becomes particularly evident on the top of p. 6, where the paper says “if in the past terrorists had to produce significant events that would capture the media’s attention (such as the terror attacks of 9/11), in the social media era they have more control over the message as they don’t only create the event, to a large extent they also create the media coverage of the event using the content they create and publish online.” Does this suggest that the availability of social media incentivizes more terrorist attacks, or fewer because there is less of a need for violence as a form of signaling? Of course, this is all conjecture and the analysis cannot really speak to this directly, but some reflection on the relationship between rhetoric and behavior would speak to a broader audience. Also, in the end, is strategic communication actually effective in changing the behavior of the adversary and achieving the goals that it sets out to influence? Did Hamas’s hostage videos actually give Hamas any leverage and have an impact on either Israeli behavior or public opinion or the course of negotiations/the war?

A few other minor comments:

• Somewhere in the beginning of the paper it may be worthwhile briefly mentioning that Hamas has a long history of using videos, such as the martyr last recordings, which were also widely distributed beyond the state control.
• The three sections on strategic communication (esp. the section on the image war) are a bit repetitive, so I would do some light editing to avoid any redundancy
• Bottom of p. 7 – reads “the current study examines Hamas’s usage of hostage videos […] examing whether Hamas use those videos as a strategic communication tool.” The rest of the paper treats it as a give that Hamas does that, so it seems to me that the question should be HOW Hamas uses the videos as a form of strategic communication

Author Response

I wish to thank Reviewer 1 for the helpful comments, that helped improve my paper “Hamas’s hostage videos as a tool of strategic communication”. In line with the reviewer’s comments, I made some changes as described below (also marked in yellow in the text):

• As suggested, more information was added to the conclusions section to include information about Hamas’s objectives in using hostage videos as a strategic communication tool, and whether it was actually effective in changing the behaviour of the adversary and achieving the goals that it sets out to influence: “By using various messages in different circumstances, Hamas was able to trigger family members of hostages, and to a large extent the Israeli public, mobilizing them to pressure the Israeli government to negotiate with Hamas for the release of the hostages. In generating media attention and mobilizing Israelis to go out and protest, while criticizing the government for their failures during the war, especially in relation to releasing the hostages, Hamas’s strategic usage of hostage videos could be seen as a success. In terms of achieving their political goals - reaching a ceasefire and ending the war while the organization is still the ruling power in the Gaza strip, Hamas was less successful. If so, the strategic usage of hostage videos assists Hamas in reaching some of its objectives, mostly in the realm of influencing public opinion” P. 13.
• I especially appreciate the comment regarding the usage of terrorists’ violence as a form of costly signalling, it fits nicely with concepts appearing in the paper. As suggested, it was incorporated into the paper, including a comment about the impact of social media on the violence used: “As presented above, the concept of the ‘theatre of terror’ (Jenkins, 1975) indicates that terror organization use strategic communication as part of their overall fighting strategies. Thus, terrorists use violence as a form of signalling, in which the violent acts serve as a communicative tool (Kydd & Walter, 2006), while technological developments can affect the usage of violence. If in the past terrorists had to produce significant events that would capture the media’s attention (such as the terror attacks of 9/11 or the Munich Olympics), in the social media era they have more control over the message as they don’t only create the event, to a large extent they also create the media coverage of the event using the content they create and publish online. As suggested above, this control over the message on social media can reduce the number of casualties and level of violence if the terrorists can create messages that would be newsworthy and receive extensive attention. A prime example is terrorists’ creation and posting of hostage videos, such as Hamas’s videos analyzed in the current study” Pp. 5-6.
• I have edited the section dealing with Hamas’s media usage to include information about their usage of videos: “Publishing videos as a tool to promote its messages is a widely used tactic of Hamas for many years, especially following terror attacks. The organization tend to publish videos of the attack’s perpetrators claiming responsibility for the attack, a strategy that was found useful in increasing the media coverage of terror attacks (Weimann & Winn, 1994)” P. 7.
• In line with reviewer 1’s comment, the section dealing with strategic communication was edited to avoid redundancy: “Strategic communication plays a crucial role in political contexts, especially during conflicts. It refers to the deliberate use of communication to influence opinion, shape perceptions, and achieve political objectives. Political actors employ it to advance their preferred narratives and gain support in the “image war” that accompanies military confrontations. Before examining its use by political actors, and particularly by terrorist organizations, we must first define the concept.
• Hallahan et al. define strategic communication as the “purposeful use of communication by an organization to fulfill its mission” (Hallahan, Holtzhausen, van Ruler, Vercˇicˇ & Sriramesh, 2007, p. 3). Holtzhausen and Zerfass (2013) expand this definition to include the organization’s strategic plan and emphasize the role of communication in enabling goal achievement. They describe it as “deliberate and purposive communication enacted in the public sphere on behalf of a communicative entity to reach set goals” (p. 74). Gregory (2005) highlights that strategic communication activities can be persuasive, cooperative, or coercive. From a management perspective, Bockstette (2008) defines it as “the systematic planning and realization of information flow, communication, media development and image care in a long-term horizon … to contribute and achieve the desired long-term effect” (p. 9).

Strategic communication encompasses the full process: source, target audience, message, channel, and impact evaluation (Kim, 2015; Rothenberger, 2015). Its role in establishing and managing reputation has become increasingly salient, with scholars emphasizing trust-building and positive image creation (Holtzhausen & Zerfass, 2015; Zerfass et al., 2014). Though the concept originated in security studies (Farwell, 2012; Paul, 2011), it gained broader traction in the second decade of the twenty-first century and now serves as an umbrella term covering public relations, marketing, health communication, public diplomacy, and campaigning (Holtzhausen & Zerfass, 2015).

During conflicts, political actors use strategic communication to frame narratives, build coalitions, counter adversaries, and influence perceptions as part of their international relations efforts. To succeed, they have shifted from traditional information policies to integrated strategies (Bolt, 2024). Digital communication dynamics further complicate this process, requiring innovative uses of social media to maximize impact while promoting national interests, particularly in defense and security contexts (Mitrovic & Vasiljević, 2021; Mitrovic & Vulić, 2019).

The concept of Imagefare (Ayalon, Popovich & Yarchi, 2016) underscores the centrality of image considerations in conflict, stressing that perceptions among foreign publics directly affect political actors’ ability to achieve their goals. Similarly, Lipińska, Ostasz & Miron (2023) highlight the growing need for comprehensive communication strategies in military operations, given the decisive role of perception in contemporary conflicts” Pp. 4-5.

• As suggested, the question regarding Hamas’s usage of strategic communication was modified: “The current study examines Hamas’s usage of hostage videos during 20 months of the war between Hamas and Israel, examining how Hamas use those videos as a strategic communication tool” P. 8.

Thank you again for taking the time and for your suggestions. Please let me know if any additional information is needed.

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

well presented and organised. good methodology. May be usefull to bring more about multimodality and Jihadist ideology analysis but not crucial. 

Author Response

I wish to thank Reviewer 2 for his support in publishing my paper “Hamas’s hostage videos as a tool of strategic communication”.

As suggested, I added information regarding multimodality and Jihadist ideology: “social media in particular allows jihadist groups to spread their ideology using multimodal strategies, employing various methods and media to communicate their messages and legitimize their actions. They combine visual imagery, verbal messages, music (e.g. ISIS’s usage of Islamic songs - nasheeds) and textual references to promote a compelling narrative (Aasha, 2018; Yarchi, 2019)” P. 3.  

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This is a very interesting and in general, well researched and written topical paper. There are however, a number of suggestions to be offered to help improve the work even more. 

There are a number of aspects that need to be made more overt and obvious, this is not a new phenomena, it has been a constant feature of asymmetric warfare (such as terrorism) where the weaker side militarily makes greater use of non-kinetic forms of warfare to try and offset their kinetic power disadvantage. Propaganda of the act (e.g. videos) tends to play a supportive role to propaganda of the word (the political component).

Some of the literature is rather old when it comes to the specific topics being covered, for example references from the early 2000s on the role of social media in these contexts. There has been a lot happening and evolving in such areas in the last 20 years and some key contemporary texts are missing. This is particularly obvious when examining key literature on terrorism and the use of organised persuasive communications as PR or political marketing.

Avoid using broad generalities such as "Terrorism these days is not only focused on ideology but also on strategy." Terrorism has always been about strategy, without it the organisation will not gain any political traction, facade or attraction or appeal. 

Although the selection of video data is sufficiently justified and motivated, the method for interpreting the videos is not sufficiently clear and articulated. 

Author Response

I wish to thank Reviewer 3 for the helpful comments, that helped improve my paper “Hamas’s hostage videos as a tool of strategic communication”. In line with the reviewer’s comments, I made some changes as described below (some are also marked in yellow in the text):

• The reviewer is rightly claiming that the fact that the weaker side militarily makes greater use of non-kinetic forms of warfare to try and offset their kinetic power disadvantage is not a new phenomenon. In accordance, on page three while presenting the notion of Image War, a similar argument is made: “This phenomenon is particularly pronounced in asymmetric conflicts, where non-state actors confront militarily superior states. In such scenarios, public opinion significantly influences both military decisions and diplomatic processes (Yarchi & Ayalon, 2023; Yarchi, 2016). Weaker adversaries in asymmetric conflicts frequently use media and visual imagery as strategic tools to offset their lack of military power and to rally public support (Roger, 2013). Known as the "reverse asymmetry" effect, this dynamic allows these actors to manipulate visual narratives to shift public sympathies and, in turn, the balance of power between the actors involved in the conflict while recruiting international support. Although stronger actors possess greater military capacity, their actions are often constrained by concerns over global image and legitimacy (Ayalon, Popovich, & Yarchi, 2016)”. P. 3.
• In line with the reviewer’s comment regarding the need to present newer literature while dealing with terrorism and social media (especially in relations to political marketing strategies), various more recent studies were added to the literature review. Among them are: Borelli, 2023; Jetter, 2017; Simons, 2018; Weimann, 2014; Weimann & Pack, 2023.
• As noted by the reviewer, terrorism has always been about strategy (as presented in the beginning of the paper’s literature review). In accordance, the relevant sentence was modified and now reads: “Thus, terrorism is not only focused on ideology but also on strategy – as can be seen in the definition of the concept – as the meaning of the word “terror” is to spread fear”. P. 5.
• In addition, changes were made in the method section to make the analysis clearer: “The analysis examined a range of characteristics to distinguish between different genres of hostage-related publications, as well as to identify recurring elements across formats. Each publication was analyzed to determine its core message, the use of repeated hashtags (which often signaled the main theme), and the representation of the hostages themselves. Key questions included: Are hostages speaking in the video? If so, what is their central message? Are they addressing their families, the Israeli government, the Prime Minister, or the broader Israeli public? Does the video disclose the hostages’ fate? Are props used to enhance the message? The analysis also explored whether blame is placed on the Israeli government, its leadership, or the military, as well as references to current events. Special attention was paid to messages directed at international audiences and foreign leaders, to better understand the intended targets of Hamas’s media output. In addition, the study examined visual and graphic design elements in both videos and infographics, aiming to identify distinctive stylistic features associated with different genres or messages, as well as the usage of Hashtags, the languages presented in the media products, and the usage of catch phrases”. Pp. 8-9.

 

Thank you again for taking the time and for your suggestions. Please let me know if any additional information is needed.

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf