New York Times Issues Correction After Outcry Over October 7 Victimhood Remark
Translated & summarized from N12 by baba
The New York Times removed a sentence stating Israelis "still see themselves as the victims of October 7" after widespread criticism and accusations of bias. The newspaper called it an "editorial error," but an Israeli diplomat accused it of revealing its "true colors" and consistent anti-Israel bias.
The story in 5 lines · by baba
- New York Times removed sentence about Israelis viewing themselves as October 7 victims.
- Sentence removal followed widespread online criticism and accusations of bias.
- The newspaper cited an "editorial error" for the controversial phrasing.
- An Israeli diplomat called the remark an exposure of the Times' "true colors."
- The incident is part of ongoing accusations of anti-Israel bias against the paper.
The New York Times issued a clarification and removed a sentence from an article that sparked outrage online, with critics accusing the newspaper of bias against Israel. The sentence in question stated that Israelis "still see themselves as the victims of October 7." This phrasing, published in an article about the Israeli documentary "No Other Land," was interpreted by many as questioning Israel's victim status following the Hamas attacks.
The controversial sentence originally read: "But most Israelis still see themselves as the victims of October 7." The article also noted that "only a small minority of Israelis demonstrated against the army's conduct in the war, with most seeing it as a justified self-defense campaign."
The remark ignited a firestorm on social media, with prominent figures like Israeli diplomat Tal Naim, spokesperson for the Israeli Embassy in Washington, condemning the newspaper. Naim stated that the remark exposed the Times' "true colors" and was not merely an "editorial error" but a reflection of a consistent bias against Israel over the past three years.
The New York Times responded via a post on X (formerly Twitter) and a note at the bottom of the article, attributing the sentence to an "editorial error." They explained that the sentence was intended to describe Israelis' perception of the government's response to the attack, but it mistakenly implied that their experience as terror victims was a matter of perception. The newspaper confirmed the sentence had been removed from the article.
This incident adds to a pattern of accusations of anti-Israel bias leveled against the New York Times, particularly since the start of the war in Gaza. A recent Yale University study, analyzing over 1,500 articles from October 2023 to June 2024, found the Times' coverage to be biased against Israel by downplaying its losses and minimizing Hamas's role in the conflict. Israel has also announced plans to sue the newspaper for defamation over a separate article reporting allegations of sexual assault by Israeli forces and settlers.
Mentioned
