A Washington Post headline asserts that Israel has a 'double standard' for policing in its Arab communities. But details in the newspaper's own report refute this claim.
CAMERA prompts correction of a Reuters article which erroneously claimed that gay marriages are "illegal" in Israel. While gay marriages, like all Jewish marriages in Israel carried outside the Orthodox Rabbinate are not recognized, they are not in violation of any law.
When political leaders talk of conversion therapy, killing Jews, or hanging gays, the New York Times seems to care less about the oppressed minorities and more about the nationality of the politicians.
AFP's Arabic service offers up a unique and misleading description of Haifa, dubbing it "the Arab mixed city in the north," ignoring 75 percent of the city's population, which is Jewish. The news agency's English article, in contrast, accurately describes Haifa as "the mixed Arab-Jewish city of Haifa in northern Israel."
Sky News Arabia's shoddy coverage of elections in the Golan Heights' Druze towns mirrors the type of anti-Israel propaganda rampant in the Arab media and reflects a disregard for basic journalistic standards which casts a shadow on its London-based parent.
One can debate the merits and demerits of a law while presenting the facts accurately. Indeed, that is the role of a journalist. Both news stories and opinion columns should be based on accurate facts without overstatement or distortion. Unfortunately, many in the mainstream media have failed in these respects.
In both a news article and an editorial, The Los Angeles Times misrepresents Israel's new nation-state law, inaccurately stating that it grants an "advantageous status to Jewish-only communities.
After CAMERA contacted officials at Wheaton College about its concerns with the work of Professor Gary Burge (left), the school's provost responded by stating he will take no formal action.
After communication with CAMERA staff, The Forward corrected its erroneous claim that Jerusalem Arabs are not allowed to move into the city's Jewish sector.
If 62 percent of Arabs in Israel back the state's national service program, why does a New York Times story on the subject devote 82 percent of quoted words by Arabs to opponents of the program? The newspaper is forcing stories through its preferred frame.