Disaster NYT admits error in Gaza hospital report - Early coverage “relied too heavily on claims by Hamas,” the editors’ note reads.

The New York Times walked back its initial coverage on the explosion that killed hundreds of Palestinians at a Gaza Strip hospital last week, saying in an editors’ note that the newspaper “relied too heavily on claims” made by the Hamas militant group.

Soon after a huge blast rocked the al-Ahli Hospital on Tuesday, finger-pointing over its source began.

Hamas, which has been battling Israel since its Oct. 7 surprise attack on Israeli soil, called the blast a “horrific massacre” and blamed the Israeli government. Israel, however, blamed the Islamic Jihad, a smaller, more radical group that often works with Hamas.

Several news outlets, including The Times, Reuters and The Associated Press faced criticism for publishing Hamas’ viewpoint prominently in articles and on social media.

“The Times’s initial accounts attributed the claim of Israeli responsibility to Palestinian officials, and noted that the Israeli military said it was investigating the blast,” reads the Times’ editors’ note published on Monday. Early coverage “relied too heavily on claims by Hamas, and did not make clear that those claims could not immediately be verified.”

The newspaper’s coverage had a clear impact, according to the note: “The report left readers with an incorrect impression about what was known and how credible the account was.”

It’s still unclear exactly how the explosion at the hospital occurred, but it doesn’t appear that Israel was at fault.

An Associated Press analysis found that a rocket fired from within Palestinian territory that broke up while in the air likely fell onto the hospital, causing the catastrophe. Citing U.S. intelligence, President Joe Biden told Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Wednesday that it looks like “the other team did it.”


“While we continue to collect information, our current assessment, based on analysis of overhead imagery, intercepts and open source information, is that Israel is not responsible for the explosion at the hospital in Gaza yesterday,” National Security Council spokesperson Adrienne Watson tweeted after Biden’s statement.

The Times stopped short of an apology for its initial coverage but said editors should have been more careful with the way the blast was represented.

“Given the sensitive nature of the news during a widening conflict, and the prominent promotion it received, Times editors should have taken more care with the initial presentation, and been more explicit about what information could be verified,” the note reads.

 
Can't help but notice that neither article definitively states that Israel or Hamas did it, even now. They're just apologizing for giving Hamas too much press coverage. The more time we have to study the scene and "evidence" the more it indicates the IDF did some sort of strike, likely an airburst with a small munition of some sort delivered by a jet, something we can see as it drops flares a several seconds before the explosion happens.An impact from one of those dinky Hamas rockets hitting the ground would not have killed people on the grassy area on both sides of the parking lot, not would it have damaged the rooftops of all the adjacent buildings. Only an airburst showing shrapnel and concussive force would have done that. 500 was obviously a ridiculous number, but the amount of injuries is still high.
 
“While we continue to collect information, our current assessment, based on analysis of overhead imagery, intercepts and open source information, is that Israel is not responsible for the explosion at the hospital in Gaza yesterday,” National Security Council spokesperson Adrienne Watson tweeted after Biden’s statement.
Strong "we investigated ourselves and found we did nothing wrong" vibes.

I've seen convincing Doppler analysis of the bomb drop indicating it came from the East, and forensic audio analysis of a supposedly intercepted discussion between two Hamas operatives claiming responsibility, that indicates the conversation has been reconstituted from pieces of at least two others (if it isn't outright fraudulent). Plus, just listening with your own ears: it sounds like a bomb; not a bottle rocket that ran out of gas and fell from the sky on a parabolic trajectory.

On the other hand, the only evidence I have seen to the contrary is a bunch of uni party hacks going "trust us, bro".

I think what happened here is the IDF bombed the wrong building, or maybe someone went rogue. But of course, this is a colossal fuckup at a critical time, and so the evidence to the contrary had to be hastily and sloppily constructed... not that it matters; anyone pretending like this isn't a "history is written by the victors" thing that will be swept under the rug is fooling themselves, but I'd still like to know the truth.
 
Back