Before the latest cease-fire, Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas was quoted without challenge saying that since the summer,"thousands of [Gazan] homes have been destroyed." But is this true?
In this Sunday's New York Times, reporter Craig Smith wrote 1179 words on the so-called Sheba Farms issue, and after presenting the basics more or less accurately, still managed to omit virtually every key fact. For example, if Sheba were turned over to Lebanon, Hezbollah has already claimed other land in Israel as belonging to Lebanon, and therefore in need of "liberation."
The perception that Israel's response to Hezbollah attacks was disproportionate, and that indiscriminate force was aimed at the Lebanese population, was largely a result of media reports on the casualty breakdown in Lebanon. But there is plenty of reason to doubt often repeated claims that almost all Lebanese casualties were civilians.
A blog-driven exposé of Reuters' doctored photos may be the tip of an iceberg of manipulated information and photographs coming from Hezbollah-controlled areas. The question is will America's prestige media give greater scrutiny to the images they publish?
A July 27 article in the New York Times about four UN officers killed in an outpost hit by Israeli fire ("U.N. Says It Protested to Israel for 6 Hours During Attack That Killed 4 Observers in Lebanon" by Warren Hoge), omitted crucial context about Hezbollah firing from or near UN positions.
The New York Times seems to be slipping back into a pattern of coverage skewed toward Palestinian perspectives in its headlines, human interest stories and characterizations of terrorist actions and counter-actions.
The International Herald Tribune wrongly blamed an unexploded Israeli shell for the death of two Palestinians in Khan Yunis last month. CAMERA staff prompted the following correction:
Referring to the so-called Palestinan prisoners' document, an editorial in the New York Times wrongly claimed Hamas "endorse[d] a document that implicitly recognizes Israel within its pre-1967 borders" ("Hamas Provokes a Fight," June 29).
The following day, the newspaper published the folowing CAMERA letter pointing out Hamas continues to reject Israel's right to exist
Even while Hamas officials unequivocally stress the signing of prisoners' document does not mean the group accepts Israel's legitimacy, some news organizations continue to wrongly claim that by signing the document, Hamas leaders "effectively endorse a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict." Other news organizations, however, have significantly improved their reporting on the document.
CAMERA has repeatedly faulted the New York Times for whitewashing and excusing Palestinian terrorism and repeating terroristsí¢â‚¬™ claims at face value. Faced with a newly published volume ("Politics, Charity, and Terrorism in the Service of Jihad," by Matthew Levitt, Yale University Press, 2006) that exposes the Hamas organizationí¢â‚¬™s single-minded goal of jihad against Israel, the Times review of the book once more rationalizes the terrorist nature of the organization.