NYT columnist Michelle Goldberg referred to Hasan Piker's "jejune sympathies for all sorts of brutal anti-American regimes." If Piker's politics are "jejune," why is NYT promoting him so vigorously? Is it really Piker's politics that are jejune, or maybe it's Goldberg's journalism?
The New York Times keeps trying to figure out why the U.S. went to war with Iran. Having proposed multiple answers, it now offers another one -- producing confusion instead of clarity.
A New York Times Opinion article made erroneous claims regarding the number of civilians killed in Gaza. CAMERA's communication with the outlet led to a correction.
The New York Times published a second article on Israel's alleged plan for regime change in Iran. Just like the first article on the topic, this report too demonstrates serious issues.
The New York Times mentioned Tel Aviv as Israel's capital and seat of government. After CAMERA contacted the outlet, it refused to correct the mistake.
The New York Times' Executive Editor Joseph Kahn made comments suggesting he is distancing himself and the paper's newsroom from Nicholas Kristof's opinion column that blamed Israel for systematic sexual abuse and rape of Palestinians. Kahn's comments leave some important questions unanswered.
The New York Times reported that activists in San Francisco harassed Scott Wiener, a state senator from California, ostensibly over his views on Israel. But the Times barely acknowledged Wiener's Jewishness, downplaying critical context that suggests the plausible conclusion that Wiener was harassed because of his identity—not his views.
In March, the New York Times asserted that Israel played an outsized role in the White House's decision to go to war with Iran. But in June, the publication claimed that it was mere "perception" that Israel dragged the U.S. to war. What changed? Does The Times know the facts?
