The Philadelphia Inquirer either presents a deliberately misleading picture or demonstrates a shockingly superficial understanding of the conflict. Exposed here are five basic lies used to mislead the paper's audience.
More evidence that the demand by Guardian readers for new anti-Israel libels continues to greatly outstrip supply is found in an article falsely accusing Israel of using a cancer causing agent in South Lebanon as part of their campaign of "ecocide".
CAMERA prompts an Associated Press correction of the false claim that Hamas' Ministry of Health in Gaza "says women and children make up most of the dead." In fact, even the Hamas ministry says less than half are women and children. Scores of news outlets republish AP's correction.
Calling Israel’s rejection of Trump’s Gaza proposal an 'anti-peace' move frames security concerns as unimportant and oversimplifies 'peace' as a concept that means the same thing to everyone.
Multiple levels of hearsay now suffices for reporting, according to NPR. In lowering its standards, it repeated false statistics that it did not bother to fact-check.
The New York Times (re)introduced its audience to, and promoted the work of, Gazan blood-libel-photojournalist Saher Alghorra. Alghorra was unable to photograph a single Hamas fighter, but last year, photographed an emaciated baby who The Times later had to acknowledge was not healthy before the war, as the caption initially stated.
The Guardian shouldn’t be seen as a respectable media outlet or simply one that is “far left,” CAMERA's Adam Levick writes in JNS. Rather, it's an propaganda organ that fuels antisemitism in the United Kingdom.
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?
