Image from IDF Spokesperson Unit, circulating on social media while search was underway in July 2014
CAMERA’s Israel office today prompted correction of an egregious error in Haaretz‘s English edition after Chemi Shalev referred to the July 2014 kidnapping and murder of three Israeli teens as “the kidnapping of three Israeli soldiers in July 2014.” Shalev, Haaretz‘s U.S. editor and correspondent, wrote (“A respite up north from PM’s deranged election campaign,” page 2, Sept. 3, and online here):
In a transparent effort to harm Channel 12, Netanyahu picked on the new HBO series “Our Boys,” which recounts the brutal murder of Palestinian teen Mohammed Abu Khdeir by Jewish zealots seeking revenge for the kidnapping of three Israeli soldiers in July 2014.
Eyal Yifrach (19), Gilad Shaar (16), and Naftali Frankel (16) were all civilians
– yeshiva students, not soldiers. Indeed, Gilad and Naftali, still in high school, were too young to have been soldiers, when they were kidnapped and murdered, not just kidnapped. Given that the brutal crime shocked and deeply traumatized the Israeli nation, and sparked a series of events which led to Israel’s 2014 war with Hamas, it is not clear how Shalev got this wrong. It is also troubling that the misinformation made it past additional Haaretz
editors who may have reviewed the piece.
In response to communication today from CAMERA’s Israel office, editors commendably corrected the digital article. The amended text now accurately states:
In a transparent effort to harm Channel 12, Netanyahu picked on the new HBO series “Our Boys”, which recounts the brutal murder of Palestinian teen Mohammed Abu-Khdeir by Jewish zealots seeking revenge for the kidnapping and murder of three Israeli teens in July 2014.
In addition, editors commendably appended the following note to the bottom of the article alerting readers to the change:
A previous version of this article incorrectly stated that the three Israelis kidnapped and murdered in July 2014 were soldiers.
Sept. 5 Update: Haaretz Publishes Print Correction
The following correction appeared on page 2 of today's print edition: