A New York Times op-ed claims the recent wars in the Middle East demonstrate "the new physics of power." But these allegedly new physics are actually quite old.
A CAMERA Espanol study of EFE's post-Oct. 7 coverage finds anti-Israel libels -- from organ harvesting, to snipers targeting infants and the bombing of the Minab girls' school in Iran -- levelling up as supposedly legitimate news. Meanwhile, Hamas and Hezbollah violence melts away as episodic or nonexistent background noise.
Mancini also failed to scrutinize any of El-Sayed’s arguments. The old rule in journalism, “If your mother says she loves you, check it out,” is no longer operational.
CAMERA noted that The New York Times met its standards with regard to source attribution for claimed Israeli casualties, but not for Lebanese casualties. The New York Times amended its coverage as a result.
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.
This week, NBC's Gabe Gutierrez insinuated that Israel was trying to "drag" the United States into a conflict it didn't want to be in. But President Trump's own statements, and U.S. military actions over the past few weeks, prove this to be false framing.
“Reduced U.S. interests in the Middle East” is a fantasy, stemming from the illusion of U.S. oil independence. One would think that rising gas prices would have ended this myth by now after exposing how U.S. prices still reflect global production. On top of that, U.S. allies and partners in Asia and Europe, which Walldorf elevates as priorities, need Middle Eastern oil for their own economies.