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.

 
Editors’ Note: Gaza Hospital Coverage
The New York Times (archive.ph)
2023-10-23 11:02:19GMT

On Oct. 17, The New York Times published news of an explosion at a hospital in Gaza City, leading its coverage with claims by Hamas government officials that an Israeli airstrike was the cause and that hundreds of people were dead or injured. The report included a large headline at the top of The Times’s website.

Israel subsequently denied being at fault and blamed an errant rocket launch by the Palestinian faction group Islamic Jihad, which has in turn denied responsibility. American and other international officials have said their evidence indicates that the rocket came from Palestinian fighter positions.

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. However, the early versions of the coverage — and the prominence it received in a headline, news alert and social media channels — relied too heavily on claims by Hamas, and did not make clear that those claims could not immediately be verified. The report left readers with an incorrect impression about what was known and how credible the account was.

The Times continued to update its coverage as more information became available, reporting the disputed claims of responsibility and noting that the death toll might be lower than initially reported. Within two hours, the headline and other text at the top of the website reflected the scope of the explosion and the dispute over responsibility.

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. Newsroom leaders continue to examine procedures around the biggest breaking news events — including for the use of the largest headlines in the digital report — to determine what additional safeguards may be warranted.
 
Reminds me of the ambulance fake-out from one of the previous Israel/Pali slapfights. Zombietime has a nice write-up/archive of the whole thing.

TL;DR: Palestinians claim Israelis fired an airstrike that obliterated a Red Cross ambulance. Israel denied this. Palis showed an ambulance with the top vent pulled off and some artistic scorches on the inside… if you’ve ever seen any car hit by an air strike, that sucker is a burnt out wreck of twisted metal.
 
I can't find it at the moment, but there's a screenshot of the NYT headline as it evolved. Anyone have it?
 
One side only tells truths, the other only lies. Each calls the other liars while proclaiming to speak true. Make your choice journalists.
 
At least the bullshit media report debunks any "USA media owned by Israel" narrative. Maybe people finally start to understand the insanity of immediately assuming the weaker side is morally superior. But I fucking want to kill the journos that ignore the massacre of Jews that preluded the war.
ITS NOT GOOD ENOUGH, GOY!!!
 
I’m angry I can’t find the old fauxtograph from 2004? 2005? Where the Palestinian literally used the clone tool in photoshop to create clouds of smoke to make two small attacks look like the whole sky is filled with smoke. Fucking hilarious.
Its impressive how buck broken by the IDF Hamas is that they've wound up imitating the worst practices of the leftist Jews in the West.
 
They did? Really? I'm shocked and never would have guessed!

This war is doing quite a bit of exposing of the MSM to the normie masses.
 
These people don't want to admit there are truly evil people out there while calling someone who just says something they don't like 'evil'.
 
Back