« Reuters: Palestinians 'Died on the Scene' of Attacks | Main | CAMERA Corrects on 'Understanding Palestinians' »

November 23, 2015

NY Times Headline Bias Again on Display

Eylon A. Levy flagged this egregiously skewed New York Times headline yesterday, tweeting:

Levy NYT headline.JPG

Here's a news flash for those who rely on Timesheadlines to keep current: Palestinians carried out three separate terror attacks against Israelis yesterday, stabbings and a car ramming, killing 21-year-old Hadar Buchris in the third attack. The "three Palestinians killed," as The Times headline puts it, were the three assailants. The grossly distorted Times headline gives no indication that the three Palestinian were the perpetrators, not victims, of attacks.

Later yesterday the headline was substantially improved:

nyt three attackers killed.JPG

This is not the first time in recent months that a Times headline falsely depicted Palestinian attackers as victims.

Last April, when two Palestinians attacked policeman with knifes, the headline was:

nyt Israeli police kill Palestinians.JPG

And, a year ago, when a Palestinian stabbed Israeli soldier Almog Shiloni to death in a Tel Aviv train station, Times headline writers replaced the original straightforward, accurate headline ("Palestinian Stabs Israeli Soldier at Tel Aviv Train Station") with an obtuse headline which whitewashed Palestinian responsibility ("Palestinians Are Suspected As Two Israelis Die in Knife Attacks").

Posted by TS at November 23, 2015 03:56 AM


Even beyond the title the article has shameful inaccuracies. Ms. Rudoren writes "More than 90 Palestinians have been killed during the period, about half while attacking or trying to attack Israelis, and the rest during demonstrations where they clashed with Israeli soldiers." However, according to figures released by Israeli authorities last week, of the 82 Palestinian Arabs who had been killed, 52 had been attacking Israelis at the time of their deaths, which is well over half. Even if the additional 8 Arabs killed were all the result of clashes at demonstrations, 52:38 is still substantially more than half and should be represented accurately.

Also worth noting, although it will be a sore point for the people of the Times, is that the area which they are referring to is not "Occupied West Bank" but is rather "disputed territory" to which both sides lay claim. In that the borderline known as the "Green line" was definitively rejected by the Arabs in 1949, and was certainly not respected as a national border in 1967 (as evidenced by the Jordanian willingness to attack), to define it as belonging to one side or the other is entirely inaccurate. It is only through the process of negotiation and mutual agreement that the borderline between a Palestinian Arab state and Israel will be determined, and for the New York Times to decide to bypass the Oslo Accords is both illegal and disrespectful.

Posted by: Arthur at November 23, 2015 02:55 PM

Dear NYT Editor.
When do you plan to stop the anti Israel attacks?
I know that theirs no artical in your paper, which has a ballance covarage about Israel.
No wonder so many readers have dropped NYT.
I for one afer 30 years reading your papaer have
also given up on the NYT.


Anton Loew
303 E 57st
nyc ny 10022

Posted by: Anton at November 27, 2015 11:07 AM

Guidelines for posting

This is a moderated blog. We will not post comments that include racism, bigotry, threats, or factually inaccurate material.

Post a comment

Remember Me?

(you may use HTML tags for style)