Let’s say you are a typical New York Times reader. You have a job, a family, and a busy life. You trust the Times to give you an accurate daily overview of the world. You don’t, for instance, feel that you have to check alternate news sources to make sure that the paper is honestly reporting whether Hurricane Joaquin is a threat or not.
So you open your Times this morning, to “Anger Rises to West Bank After Deaths.” The article is devoted to Eitam and Naama Henkin, the Jewish settlers who were killed in the occupied West Bank on Thursday, apparently by Palestinian gunmen. You learn at some length what the president of Israel said at their funeral, what the prime minister of Israel said, and what one of the couple’s neighbors said. The article is accompanied by a photograph of a mourner at the graveside of the couple. The article links to an earlier Times article that describes “photographs of the parents and their bloodied car on Twitter” — a link that takes you to the Israeli army spokesman’s extremely graphic pictures of the murder scene (deep inside Palestinian territory). You finish the article with a feeling of sadness and resignation, “Why can’t those Palestinians stop their endless terrorism?” you may ask yourself.
Nine days earlier, Israeli soldiers killed the Palestinian teenager Hadil al-Hashlamoun at a checkpoint in Palestine. Your newspaper has had nothing at all to say about her since its first, somewhat confusing report. The Times made no effort to talk to her neighbors or her family, (even though this site had no trouble interviewing them). There are striking photographs of the Israeli soldier in uniform pointing his automatic weapon at her just before he killed her, but you have never seen those photos in your daily newspaper.
The circumstances of Hadil al-Hashlamoun’s death are suspicious to say the least, but none of the three Times reporters in the area have looked into it. In today’s article, she is not even mentioned.
If the typical Times reader got to read articles about Hadil-al-Hashlamoun, and to see the stark photographs of her killing, how long before public opinion started to change even faster than it already has?
No one expects the Times to turn into a pro-Palestinian propaganda organ. No one is suggesting that the Times ignore events like the killing of the Henkins. But the newspaper should live up to its own stated values of balance and objectivity, and stop suppressing the news about Hadil Al-Hashlamoun.
The NYT is completely complicit in Israeli/US crimes against Palestinian humanity.
Their readers will know the truth about Palestine and Israel when they begin to allow the scales to fall from their eyes and realize that this pretentious fish wrap and status symbol of a rag belongs in the millions of trash cans around the world. It’s home to a very special branch of Hasbara Central.
Readers of the NYT will know the truth when pigs fly.
Thanks, James.
The Times is wedded to the narrative (as is all our MSM) that Arabs are naturally violent and inherently bigoted against Jews. Jewish violence is self-defense or a response to an Arab outrage. And if Jews are bigoted it is because Arab violence has made them so.
RE: “No one is suggesting that the Times ignore events like the killing of the Henkins. But the newspaper should live up to its own stated values of balance and objectivity, and stop suppressing the news about Hadil Al-Hashlamoun.” ~ North
MY COMMENT: Perhaps the New York Times coverage of the Middle East will become a bit more balanced/objective when Mexico’s Carlos Slim (or his heirs) finally takes over. That’s the only hope I see for balance/objectivity in the NYT‘s I-P coverage. And it’s a very meager hope indeed!
FROM WIKIPEDIA (Carlos Slim):
SOURCE – https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlos_Slim
Not sure the ‘typical’ NYT reader deserves the dismissive tone expressed in your article, Mr. North. If he/she is anything like me – who subscribes and reads the paper online everyday –
he/she will also want to get information daily from other sources. Why else am I checking MW every single day? Trust but verify – very wise words.
You might get a different sense of the NYT readership if you were to read the comments posted by readers in response to many of the articles, especially the most controversial. You would be surprised by how the ‘most recommended’ are often in line with your (and my) views.
I have to agree that the NYT is not ‘fair and balanced’ in its reporting on the I/P issue, but just look at who its ME bureau chief is. Then again, which US medium is? The bigger question you should be addressing iswho’s controlling what gets published? If every single US administration since 1948 has been unwilling or unable to take a fair position re: the illegal Israeli occupation and continuous expansion on Palestinian land, how can any news outlet dare speak up against it?
And Mondoweiss reciprocates by presenting its blind-sided view of reality in Israel/Palestine!
You would get the impression around here that Palestinians were the only people getting killed in this conflict.