I think the question of journalistic access is intimately related to the political realities 'on the ground'.
Involved parties will try to control access, and the more powerful party will have more control.
In Vietnam, even though some intrepid reporters 'crossed the line', most reporting was done from areas under American control.
In Iraq, reporters were 'embedded'.
A BBC journalist who announces the intention to report in Israël, are lavishly received by bright and polite young people with perfect english, given access to blue-screen facilities and all mod-cons. When they want to speak to a palestinian, they often find themselves reduced to a crackling landline, trying to understand a very upset man with a terrible accent.
Of course the politics weigh heavily on how journalists get to see the situation.
What is more, the entirely spurious accusation of anti-semitism makes me very, very angry. Making a critique of Israeli policy is not the same as denouncing jewry. One doesn't have to be anti-american to critique american policy, or anti-russian to question Putin's decisions. Used in this way, it's not an argument, it's an insult.
It is not for nothing we call ourselves a judeo-christian culture. Jews made an enormous portion of our culture, music, literature, science, psycho-analysys, Jews were the most enthusiastic adopters, and thus creators, of our mittel-europäisch, middle-class, bourgeois culture, the culture where one was supposed to acquire a discerning eye and ear. Through the horror of the holocaust they taught us the barbarity of racism, and impressed the need for universal values, values that encompass all of humanity, that tell us every life is sacred.
In this context, it is harrowing to see a death-toll of twelve hundred and rising, a quarter of which are children, and the to have to note the following line gliding under a talking head : 'Israeli soldier twists ankle in Gaza'
If it weren't tragic, you'd have to laugh.