www.jpost.com Open in urlscan Pro
34.149.213.158  Public Scan

Form analysis
0 forms found in the DOM

Text Content

Advertisement

NY Conf Israel News Health & Wellness WORLD NEWS Middle East Business &
Innovation Opinion JP Store

Login
Log Out
Archaeology Israel Real Estate Judaism Kabbalah Science Antisemitism JP Spanish
Podcasts JP Shopping Conversation Corner Premium
Jerusalem Post Opinion


HAS THE NEW YORK TIMES BACKED DOWN FROM COVERING HAMAS'S SEXUAL CRIMES? -
ANALYSIS


PREVIOUS STUDIES SHOW CRITICISM OF THE HAMAS ATTACK VANISHED FROM THE NY TIMES.
NEW DATA SUGGESTS THAT THIS APATHY ALSO APPLIES TO HAMAS'S SEXUAL VIOLENCE

By LILAC SIGAN
MAY 24, 2024 22:38
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 

THE NEW YORK Times building in Manhattan.
(photo credit: Shannon Stapleton/Reuters)

You can call the New York Times' coverage of the war annoying, outrageous or
unfair, but above all it is heartbreaking. Yet another reason why the hearts of
Jews and Israelis have been broken again and again since October 7.



Israel is not understood these days. From inside it, it is also hard to
comprehend the wave of hatred that arose amongst those we considered friends,
all the way to the arrest warrants for Israeli leaders in The Hague. We remember
exactly what happened here almost eight months ago, and know that the wave of
hatred did not start with Israeli actions in Gaza. It started on the day of the
horrific massacre and mass abduction, and since then our hearts have been broken
a little more every day.



Last week, I published the huge gaps between the skyrocketing criticism directed
at Israel in the New York Times in the first seven months of the war, and the
low level of criticism directed at Hamas. There was also a mirror image: the
raging empathy towards Palestinians versus the meager empathy towards Israelis,
including the hostages.



Top Articles
Read More

German police arrest men planning synagogue knife attack

Skip Ad



Doctors Amazed: Foot Neuropathy Device Takes Israel by Storm Sponsored by
Neuropathy Remedies
מה קופת החולים שלך נותנת לך ומה נותנות הקופות האחרות? Sponsored by
www.kamaze.co.il
Why Seniors Are Snapping Up This TV Box, We Explain! Sponsored by Smart TV
What is Outbrain



This week will focus on the scope of coverage devoted to different aspects of
the war, which also lacked logical proportionality. Sometimes, obsessive
coverage of certain topics actually created a reality instead of reflecting the
one which exists. For example: 172 headlines dealt with the humanitarian
situation in Gaza, but not even one of them reported the violent looting of aid
trucks by Hamas terrorists.



Aside from the overwhelming concern for Palestinians, which can somehow be
understood, only 7 articles referred to the suffering of entire evacuated or
destroyed communities in northern Israel. There is no doubt Palestinians suffer
more, but does this justify such marginal coverage of Israeli distress, at a
ratio of 1:24? Seven articles out of 1,398 do not allow an understanding of both
sides in the conflict and what they are going through.


Demonstrators hold signs against the international silence over sexual violence
perpetrated against Israeli women during the attack by Hamas on October 7, at a
protest in Jerusalem, in November. (credit: REUTERS/DEDI HAYUN)

Apart from these 7 articles on damage, deaths and evacuees, bombardment and
fighting in the north received a total of only 13 more articles, some of which
were devoted to reporting on the Lebanese and Syrian side. The northern front
hardly received any attention, although just this week, the number of bomb
sirens in northern Israel exceeded the number in the south since October 7.
That’s how topics that feature what Israelis have been experiencing were
minimized.




RAPE IS NOT AN OPINION

The biggest disappointment from the Times coverage is on the issue of the
barbaric rape that took place in Israel on the day of the massacre. For a moment
it seemed different - on December 28, the Times published an extensive,
well-founded and broad investigation into the brutal rape, most of whose victims
were murdered. After shameful silence from the feminists of the world, suddenly
these victims were given a voice that globalized some of the testimonies that
shook Israeli society to its core.


What is Outbrain

The Times was not the first to expose the rape cases, but it was the first to
publish an in-depth investigation which echoed widely. The exposure was
estimated at about 10 million readers, and 1,000 mentions in other media
outlets. On the day of publication, editor-in-chief Joe Kahn sent an email to
the entire newsroom praising the investigation as a "signature piece" of war
coverage, and the team that carried it out "in a sensitive and detailed way" on
a topic that is “highly politicized". His words turned out to be very true: it
appears that for many in the newsroom rape is not a barbaric and reprehensible
crime, but rather a political issue.



The rape issue appeared in only 7 of the Times' important headlines, despite
being a central and traumatic event. 4 out of 7 were not reported but expressed
in opinion pieces, 3 of which were written by Bret Stephens, the newspaper's
sole pro-Israel writer. Even the launching of Sheryl Sandberg's documentary
about the systemic Hamas rape was not reported as news but only in the context
of an opinion piece, as if the rape cases are a pro-Israel opinion. In the news
headlines, the rape issue appeared only twice: once in the courageous interview
with former hostage Amit Soussana, and once in a headline about the UN report
that confirmed the systemic rape and was published in early March. 



The seventh time the issue appeared was not exactly coverage – it was an article
that contradicted one of the testimonies in the original Times investigation. A
soldier from a special unit testified that he saw the bodies of two girls who
were raped in Kibbutz Beeri, but the new article reported that the kibbutz
announced that the only two bodies of girls that were found in the same room
after the massacre were not sexually violated. Beyond that, the chaotic day of
October 7 was not mentioned, or that it is reasonable to assume that the stunned
special unit soldier did not quite remember whether he saw the girls in Kibbutz
Beeri or in Nahal Oz or another kibbutz, since he fought for dear life in
several kibbutzes on that day and the bodies, as we know, were many.




PLEASING THE PROGRESSIVES

Strangely enough, the original rape investigation was not included in the
Today's Headlines newsletters. Strange, because all the main headlines are
included in these newsletters, certainly a headline that was prominently
featured on the front page.



A possible explanation is that the attention the investigation received panicked
the pro-Palestinian supporters. They feared it would damage their narrative, and
began attacking the Times for merely publishing the investigation. Some
journalists at the Times claimed "professional flaws" and leaked them to radical
news sites that tried to undermine the journalistic work with an orchestrated
digital lynching. Subsequently, progressive journalism professors were also
recruited to appeal to the Times to re-examine the investigation, in an
unprecedented step that has never been taken by journalism professors before for
a single article. So why this one in particular?



The internal struggle in the Times newsroom regarding the sex crime
investigation was covered by dozens of media outlets for months. It was
accompanied by an internal probe to find the leakers, threats from the union
claiming the probe was persecuting journalists of "Middle Eastern" descent, and
ultimately the entire saga was quieted down and ended with nothing. The only
injured party was the Israeli reporter who worked on the investigation - she was
originally recruited to cover the sex crimes, but was fired after being exposed
for "liking" a pro-Israeli tweet on October 7. Somehow, no one protested or
thought her dismissal was due to persecution or outrageous.



Apparently, the Times understood that you can slam Israel without fear, but it's
better to restrain stories of Hamas terrorists who raped Israeli women, because
it's "highly political." The Israeli reporter who was fired was not replaced by
someone else who took on the case.



The original intention was to submit the investigation for the Pulitzer Prize,
but in the end, seven other articles were submitted, six of which criticized
Israel. We can only assume that the Times simply succumbed to the progressive
onslaught - it didn’t want to jeopardize the prize given the criticism against
the allegedly "political" investigation.


Recommended byWhat is Outbrain

Instead of bravely submitting it and standing by the truth, the Times apparently
chose to submit articles that would be more suitable for the venue where the
prize is awarded - the school of journalism at Columbia University.Downplaying
the intense Iranian attack.



Here is an example of a single case that received the same level of coverage as
the October 7 sex crimes: the shooting of three students of Palestinian descent
in Vermont. Although it was a single case which was not even a clear hate crime
specifically against Palestinians, it was covered from every possible angle.
Neighbors and relatives were interviewed, every development in the investigation
was closely monitored, and all in the context of the most important headlines of
the day.



The Times tries to avoid the use of loaded or harsh words, but here too there
are exceptions. The word "rape" appeared in only 3 headlines out of 1,398 since
the beginning of the war, but the word "genocide" appeared 22 times in the
context of Israel (and once more in the context of Jews at campus protests). The
word "starvation" appeared 13 times in headlines and the word "famine" appeared
17 more times. The thing is, the rape actually did happen, while starvation and
genocide are unfounded accusations. So why aren't they defined as political?



Of all the collective traumas we experienced as Israelis, the way the Iranian
attack on April 14 was reported was the most heartbreaking of all. This
overwhelming event was covered with 15 headlines, but only 3 of them described
the attack itself, and they were phrased laconically as if it was merely a
mundane audiovisual show. None of them mentioned the number of ballistic
missiles and UAV’s, and none reflected the drama that plunged an entire country
into dystopian anxiety.



The remaining headlines dealt with with the subject with a cold, military,
political or global analysis, with a balance of "both sides", and
recommendations regarding the restrained way in which Israel should or should
not respond. The only empathetic headline referred to a 7-year-old girl from the
Bedouin community who was physically injured in the attack. Five more headlines
were devoted to describing the Israeli retaliation.



Just for comparison - 12 dramatic and loaded headlines were devoted to the
unfortunate case of shooting the World Central Kitchen aid convoy, some of which
reprimanded Israel as if it was done intentionally. But hundreds of ballistic
missiles and UAV’s in an unprecedented attack by a country whose intention is to
annihilate Israel, elicited far less emotion or graphic descriptions, and
required roughly the same level of coverage, according to the editors.The news
is more biased than the opinions



Surprisingly, the bias in the opinion articles was significantly less severe
than the bias in the news reports. Out of 240 opinion pieces selected as part of
the most important headlines during the war, 72 exclusively criticized Israel
(30% of the articles) and 23 exclusively criticized Hamas (9.6%). But out of
1,158 articles that are not supposed to constitute opinion but rather balanced
reporting, 49.1% were exclusively critical of Israel, while critical reports of
Hamas reached only 5.3%.



Criticism of Iran, Hamas, Hezbollah and the Houthis combined appeared in only
10.6% of the news reports. Qatar, by the way, which donated billions to elite
universities, was mentioned with a critical tone in only one headline out of 204
headlines dealing with campus protests. And amazingly enough, there was not a
single opinion piece in the Times during the war that criticized Hezbollah.



On a personal note, it's heartbreaking not only as an Israeli, but also as a
journalist. Because when the New York Times practices journalism like this, it
sets the tone for journalism as a whole. It legitimizes the propaganda industry
that is only disguised as journalism, also known as "opinion journalism". It
isn’t good for Israel, but it is also very bad for democracy.



The bottom line is that Israel received rampant and disproportionate criticism,
probably intensified by its current extremist government. But that doesn’t
explain why Hamas and Iran received very limited criticism. Something about
these reporting proportions is distorted and dangerous not only for Israel, but
for American values. It's easy to see that the subtext aligns with the lack of
proportionality at elite universities, in the media, and now also in The
Hague.Methodology 



The war articles were collected daily from the New York Times newsletter called
Today's Headlines, which aggregates the most important headlines of the passing
day (about 50 per day). A total of 1,398 articles were collected from 10/7/23 to
5/7/24. Each article was coded by two criteria: was empathy toward an individual
or group expressed in the headline, and was criticism toward a particular person
or entity expressed. Articles in which no criticism or empathy was expressed
were coded as 0.




THE TIMES’ COMMENT

In regard to this study, a spokesperson for the Times said that “It’s moments
like this when our independent reporting matters most. The New York Times has
invested more than any other US newspaper to help readers understand the
complexities of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict over the past decade and we
have some of the world’s most experienced reporters, photographers and analysts
on the ground to ensure our reporting of the Oct. 7 terrorist attack in Israel
and the ongoing Israel-Gaza war is nuanced, steeped in context and expertise.



Regarding the Dec. 28 investigation, we're confident in the accuracy of our
reporting and are continuing to report on the issue of sexual violence during
this conflict.”





Related Tags
sexual assault
sexual abuse
New York Times
The October 7 Massacre
Israel-Hamas War 2024

Take Israel home with the new
Jerusalem Post Store

Shop now >>


You Might Also Like
What is Outbrain



What is Outbrain
Skip
Ads by




Hot Opinion


BRING THEM HOME NOW: HAMAS VIDEO HIGHLIGHTS URGENCY OF HOSTAGE TALKS

By JPOST EDITORIAL


A QUIET CHINESE RAPPROCHEMENT WITH EUROPE - OPINION

By SALEM ALKETBI


ETHICALLY BANKRUPT: THE US NEEDS TO TAKE A SERIOUS LOOK AT CORRUPT COURTS

By DOUGLAS BLOOMFIELD


ISRAEL'S RAFAH OPERATION HURTS EGYPT'S PLANS

By ELIE PODEH


THE TIGHTENING OF ARMENIAN-IRANIAN TIES

By MORDECHAI KEDAR
Recommended Stories
The Nazi-Arab alliance: A neglected aspect of Holocaust education - opinion
JPost - Opinion
'I have friends in Palestine': The tragic irony of a peace activist held by
Hamas - comment JPost - Opinion
The US should sanction or shut down the ICC to save Judaism - opinion JPost -
Opinion
My Word: The Hague’s moral haze leaves a stain on history JPost - Opinion
Ethically bankrupt: The US needs to take a serious look at corrupt courts -
opinion JPost - Opinion
Israel's government would be foolish to dismiss Arab League's Manama Declaration
- opinion JPost - Opinion
The modern exodus and messianic fulfillment is today's Israel - opinion JPost -
Opinion
ICJ’s selective justice: How bias skews Rafah ruling against Israel - comment
JPost - Opinion
What is Outbrain

Most Read
1


LAST YEAR'S SWEDISH EUROVISION WINNER SAYS SHE WON'T HAND OVER TROPHY TO ISRAELI
CONTESTANT


2


DONALD TRUMP: 'IF I DON'T GET ELECTED, IT'S GOING TO BE A BLOODBATH FOR THE
COUNTRY!'


3


JEWISH CHILDREN SAVAGELY BEATEN BY MAN IN NEW YORK CITY ATTACK


4


IRAN’S AERIAL ATTACK IN APRIL IRREVOCABLY SHIFTED HOW ITS NUCLEAR THREAT IS
VIEWED


5


UN SEEMINGLY HALVES ESTIMATE OF GAZAN WOMEN, CHILDREN KILLED


Advertisement

 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 

 * 
 * 

Information
About Us
Contact us
Feedback
Terms Of Service
Privacy Policy
Subscriber Agreement
JPost Jobs
Cancel Subscription
Sitemap
פרסום בג'רוזלם פוסט
Customer Service
Advertise with Us
The Jerusalem Post Group
Breaking News
World News
Iran News
MDA Heroes
The Jerusalem Report
Jerusalem Post Lite
חדשות מעריב
Real Estate Listings
Hype
Special Content
50 Jews
JP Store
BrandBlend
Home Services
Tools and services
JPost Premium
Ulpan Online
JPost Newsletter
Our Magazines
Learn Hebrew
RSS feed
JPost.com Archive
Digital Library
Lists of Jewish holidays
Law
לוח חגים ומועדים 2023
זמני כניסת שבת
Sites Of Interest
Poalim Online
JNF-USA
Who is Hamas
The Jerusalem Post Customer Service Center can be contacted with any questions
or requests:
Telephone: *2421 * Extension 4 Jerusalem Post or 03-7619056 Fax: 03-5613699
E-mail: subs@jpost.com
The center is staffed and provides answers on Sundays through Thursdays between
07:00 AM and 14:00 PM and Fridays only handles distribution requests between
7:00 AM and 12:30 PM
For international customers: The center is staffed and provides answers on
Sundays through Thursdays between 7AM and 14PM Israel time Toll Free number
1-800-448-9291 Telephone +972-3-761-9056 Fax: 972-3-561-3699 E-mail:
subs@jpost.com
Copyright © 2024 Jpost Inc. All rights reserved • Terms of Use • Privacy Policy
Designed by