During the initial reports of the bombing of the hospital in Gaza, idiot news media all over the place were taking the word of Hamas that Israel was to blame for the attack. Those of us with common sense knew that these reports were idiotic and unfounded but the pro-Palestinian/anti-Israel news media who wanted easy clickbait ran with the story anyway.
Democrat politicians also happily parroted the information so that Israel would look bad, including antisemite Michigan Rep. Rashida Tlaib.
The New York Times, who in the past was incredibly slow to report that the Holocaust was happening, also jumped on the bandwagon to pronounce Israel as a horrible country who was committing war crimes. And where did they get their information? From the terrorists.
It took about a week, but the New York Times finally apologized for their reporting errors, with the editors saying, “The Times’s initial accounts attributed the claim of Israeli responsibility to Palestinian officials, and noted that the Israeli military said it was investigating the blast. However, the early versions of the coverage – and the prominence it received in a headline, news alert and social media channels – relied too heavily on claims by Hamas.”
Too heavily? How about ENTIRELY.
NYT went on to say they did not make clear that “those claims could not immediately be verified.”
The NYT also said, “The report left readers with an incorrect impression about what was known and how credible the account was.”
Again, no kidding. Because it was EXACTLY THE IMPRESSION they wanted to leave.
But I digress…
So the NYT like many other media outlets took the word of Hamas and screamers like Tlaib because they wanted to. They pretended to know what happened and how many people were killed – but they knew nothing except what the anti-Israel folks were telling them and so they ended up reporting fake news.
MORE NEWS: Michigan’s Crazy New Gun Laws
The NYT editors’ apology concluded with, “Given the sensitive nature of the news during a widening conflict, and the prominent promotion it received, Times editors should have taken more care with the initial presentation, and been more explicit about what information could be verified. Newsroom leaders continue to examine procedures around the biggest breaking news events – including for the use of the largest headlines in the digital report – to determine what additional safeguards may be warranted.”
The NYT doesn’t actually care about safeguards…or verifying anything…or the truth. All the news that’s fit to print is actually all the news that the NYT WANTS to print. On their mission page it says, “We seek the truth and help people understand the world” and it lists their values as independence, integrity, curiosity, respect, collaboration and excellence. I think they need to change their marketing. Or better yet – their staff.