I had posted this elsewhere but feel it is relevant to your comment. It describes Erdogan’s position towards the conflict, and could provide some context to your reminder. Worth the read.

https://www.brookings.edu/articles/understanding-turkeys-response-to-the-israel-gaza-crisis/

From your link too, said previously in 2023 by Palestinians against Hamas in the economic protests:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2023_Gaza_economic_protests

In July and August 2023, thousands of Palestinians in the Gaza Strip took to the streets to protest chronic power outages, poor economic conditions in the territory, and Hamas’s taxation of stipends to the poor paid by Qatar. The rallies, organized by a grassroots online movement called “Alvirus Alsakher” (The mocking virus), were a rare public display of discontent against the ruling Hamas government. Hamas bars most demonstrations and public displays of discontent.

This is correct, Jerusalem Report has the high rating which is published by the Jerusalem Post, though it appears these ratings are switched by op. Posted article is from the Jerusalem Post.

Similar reporting, but I think discussed an important caveat to the polling:

https://www.cnn.com/2023/12/21/middleeast/palestinians-back-hamas-survey-intl-cmd/index.html

But Shikaki cautions that higher support for Hamas should not be over-stated, at least not yet. As more Palestinians come to terms with the atrocities committed by Hamas on October 7, so attitudes could change — though that is unlikely to be the case so long as Gaza remains under massive attack.

Important again is how many people have watched videos from October 7 and the differences between the territories. In Gaza, 25% of those asked said they had viewed such videos; and 16% of all respondents told researchers Hamas had committed war crimes. In the West Bank, the corresponding numbers were just 7% and 1%.

Gaza is moving out of denial more quickly than the West Bank, Shikaki says, and that means a reckoning for Hamas. Already, only 38% of Gazans want to see the militant group return to governance after the war.

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/about/

The credibility of a website/media source is not determined by who owns them but rather by its track record. Everybody starts as a beginner and, through experience, becomes an authority in their field. MBFC is no different. Over the last 8 years, we have proven to be a trusted authority on the rating of bias and the credibility of media sources. For example, MBFC is trusted by major media outlets and IFCN fact-checkers. This is evidenced by frequently being referenced by sources such as USA Today, Reuters Fact Check, Science Feedback, Washington Post, and NPR, among dozens of others. We are also frequently used as a resource in libraries, high schools, and universities across the United States.

Media Bias/Fact Check has also been used as a resource for research by the University of Michigan and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Further, we have been utilized by numerous print books such as these:

The Rise of the Alt-Right

Fake News, Propaganda, and Plain Old Lies: Find Trustworthy Information in the Digital Age

Raising Humans in a Digital World

Everyday Media Literacy An Analog Guide for Your Digital Life

Hate Groups and Extremist Organizations in America: An Encyclopedia

Finally, MBFC scored a perfect 100/100 rating by Newsguard, which rates the credibility of Media Sources. We believe it is significant that a competitor gave us this score.

https://www.newsguardtech.com/about/why-should-you-trust-us/