It is no wonder the New York Times' recent Op-Doc (op-ed documentary film) about Israel was a biased Breaking the Silence film that demonizes and delegitimizes Israel's military and Hebron’s Jewish residents. After all, the film represents the current mindset at a newspaper committed to villifying the Jewish state, its leaders and institutions.
Target's removal of two dozen Holocaust-denial and anti-Semitic conspiracy books marketed on its website, in the wake of CAMERA's exposé is commendable, as its apology for its “error in having these books available on Target.com,” but it is only once chapter of a disturbing story whose conclusion is not yet obvious.
Increasing assaults on Holocaust memory and the concomitant rise in anti-Semitism is not limited to Europe, but is being mainstreamed in the U.S., including by one of America’s largest retail corporations that is part of the S&P 500 index -- Target. Whether through choice, negligence or ignorance, Target has allowed its online bookselling platform to become a repository of Holocaust denial and anti-Semitism by an international coterie of Holocaust deniers.
Nowhere is NPR's skewed reporting as obvious as in its coverage of Jerusalem. Misrepresentations about Israeli policy in Jerusalem were followed by a broadcast that bolstered the Hamas pretext for rocketing population centers inside Israel – namely, the “defense” of Jerusalem and Al Aqsa.
In July so far, NPR aired at least three problematic reports, that shared a common thread – omitting context and hearing from anti-Israel activists to blame Israel for dispossessing and discriminating against Palestinians and stirring conflict. It was a throwback to the NPR of the past.
For years, readers have turned to the Jerusalem Post for context that’s often missing from one-sided, anti-Israel reports in the international media. But recent coverage of a demolition in Silwan consisted of a partisan report from Reuters.
The venerable, American popular science magazine has become the latest venue for anti-Israel defamation. Why would editors cast aside the scientific tradition of fact-based inquiry in order to present pro-terrorist propaganda and the promotion of BDS in the guise of an analytic article?
Why didn’t NY Times editors find a story about antisemitic hate crime in New York City -- that most other media outlets covered --newsworthy? Was it because the identity of the perpetrator did not support the narrative of antisemitism emanating solely from Nazis, the far-right, and white supremacists?
The New York Times, once priding itself as the “paper of record,” is better recognized today as the “paper of advocacy.” Rather than documenting the various factors contributing to the unrest in Israel during Ramadan, it ignored rocketing from Gaza, emphasizing instead what could be blamed on Israeli Jews.
Anti-Zionists claim theirs is a political position rooted in progressive values and and that charges of anti-Semitism are cynical attempts to stifle their speech. Real anti-Semites, they say, are just white supremacists and neo-Nazis. It is interesting therefore to compare the language and rhetoric used by prominent anti-Zionist organizations, politicians, journalists and activists to the classic antisemitic tropes disseminated by Nazis in the prelude to and during the Holocaust.