"The truth is essential."
So the The New York Times tells us in their house ads. If you want the truth, the Times implies, we are your trusted source.
And yet, in its reporting on Israel/Palestine, the Times makes a deadly mockery of the truth.
In March, Amnesty International released a paper unequivocally calling out Israel for the crime of apartheid. The force of the condemnation alone made it newsworthy, but the Times buried the story. It waited a full 52 days to even mention the Amnesty report, and then only in passing. The global human rights reporting agency — frequently cited by the Times itself — was selectively tuned out. Israel’s crimes were casually brushed off.
The Times remains one of the world’s great newspapers (I read it every day), but on Israel/Palestine it has a long history of one-sided reporting. Its Jerusalem bureau chiefs over the years (Ethan Bronner, Isabel Kershner, Patrick Kingsley) and many of its op-ed columnists (Tom Friedman, Brett Stevens, David Brooks) have steadfastly stood by Israel, failing to call out its transgressions while showing scant sympathy for the Palestinians side. This has distorted America’s perception of what’s really going on. And the smokescreen has given cover for a succession of increasingly militant Israeli leaders. They’ve been able to double down on the Gaza blockade, expand illegal settlements in the West Bank, and refuse to come to the negotiation table in good faith.
Hopefully, the Times’ new managing editor Joseph Kahn will finally put an end to this 50-year dumbshow (if publisher A.G. Sulzberger will let him).