Posted on 10/23/2023 4:19:09 PM PDT by Impala64ssa
Citing propaganda proved painful for the Gray Lady as an uncommon step was taken to amend for pushing claims from terrorists.
Debunked reports about Israel’s responsibility for an explosion at a hospital may not have stood in the way of Michigan Rep. Rashida Tlaib’s (D) continued screeds, but it was problematic for the editors at The New York Times. As a result, nearly a week after backpedaling headlines brought further shame on the once exemplary paper of record, a rare stand-alone editors’ note was published as a mea culpa.
“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,” noted the editors, “and did not make clear that those claims could not immediately be verified. The report left readers with an incorrect impression about what was known and how credible the account was.”
Dancing around their own willingness to run a pro-Hamas angle in the wake of the slaughter of more than 1,400 people by the terrorists, the newspaper described a readily changed headline by stating, “The Times continued to update its coverage as more information became available, reporting the disputed claims of responsibility and noting that the death toll might be lower than initially reported. Within two hours, the headline and other text at the top of the website reflected the scope of the explosion and the dispute over responsibility.”
In practice those changes played out as ever-softening pander to the terrorist narrative that began as “Israeli Strike Kills Hundreds in Hospital, Palestinians Say,” became, “At Least 500 Dead in Strike on Gaza Hospital, Palestinians Say,” and wound up as, “At Least 500 Dead in Blast at Gaza Hospital, Palestinians Say.”
The editors’ note concluded with the admission, “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.”
“Too little, too late,” barely covered the response to the note from the editors as social media users saw beyond the meager self-flagellation that would hardly garner the same attention as their dangerously misleading initial reporting.
“Shouldn’t this report also include a large headline at the top of The Times’s website and the same prominence in news alerts and social media channels?” asked one user, including the hashtag “shame” as the Spectator’s contributing editor Stephen L. Miller aped, “We at The NY Times should not have just repeated what a terrorist group told us and we regret the error.”
Guess they can’t get away with it anymore.
But still, people are dead because of the reporting, like the woman head of the synogogue.
👍
Still get a Pulitzer for the story though.....
The Slimes can shove their apology.
Always, always, ALWAYS after the damage has been done. Take your apology, NY Times, and shove it!
Just who are their Hamas contacts anyway?
...and still got their protests...
Wasn’t “incorrect “
It was a complete fabrication with photos from some other place and some other building.
They made the whole thing up
TOO FREAKING LATE!
“and did not make clear that those claims could not immediately be verified....”
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
So it could not be ‘immediately’ verified.... in other words, it really was true but their only fault was that they were a little hasty in putting it out there before having full verification of it.
What a bunch of liars. And how does the pictures of bombed out buildings that were taken from some other location jive with that? They were so hasty that they accidentally mixed up a bunch of pictures?
[i]“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,” noted the editors, “and did not make clear that those claims could not immediately be verified. The report left readers with an incorrect impression about what was known and how credible the account was.”[/i]
It takes a lot of non-talent to write a sentence that shitty.
Hamas has been in charge of the Gaza strip since around 2007. Questions to the government should be directed to the Gaza Coordination and Liaison Administration. The Coordination and Liaison Administration (CLA) for Gaza is responsible for implementing the civilian policy concerning the Israeli government towards the Gaza Strip. The CLA operates under the COGAT unit and is located near the Erez Crossing, south of Ashkelon and near Kibbutz Yad Mordechai. The Gaza CLA works in coordination with representatives of the Palestinian Authority in the Gaza Strip, as well as with international organizations working in Gaza, in order to implement and strengthen civil policy concerning residents of the Gaza Strip.
Email
mnz@mgar.co.il
Tel
074-7642929
Additional telephone number
*4943
Fax
02-6599133
https://www.gov.il/en/departments/units/gaza_district_coordination_and_liaison_office
They’re in the book. They are in charge so they can be available for questions that you may or may not be given the truth. You dance, you pay the piper. After all, they are terrorists.
Seem to easy? What do they care? That help?
wy69
Screw the flea infested NYT and every hamas boot licker who works there
The nyt is the enemy’s information warfare machine.
A lame apology.
I missed the part where they apologized, and the responsible editors commited seppuku in shame.
BABI YAR
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.