In two recent articles, The New York Times has incorrectly referred to the present day West Bank or Gaza Strip as “Palestine,” contrary to Times style. References to modern “Palestine” in the West Bank and Gaza are inaccurate, and those areas should be referred to as the West Bank and Gaza Strip, or, where, appropriate (in the West Bank), “Palestinian Authority territories.”

First, a book review by Jouman Khatib errs, stating “When [author Isabella] Hammad, 27, first visited Palestine six years ago. . . ”

In addition to appearing online, the article also appeared April 4 in the Books section, then again April 5 in the New York edition, and a third time April 11 in print in the International New York Times.

A separate online article (“She was forced to marry in Bangladesh . . .”) likewise errs: “As of mid-March, 73 women had stayed at Asiya — all immigrants from Bangladesh, Egypt, Pakistan, Palestine, Syria, or Yemen . . . ”

In August 2017 and in December 2016, The New York Times commendably corrected this identical error. Other media outlets which have corrected in the past include National Geographic, The Los Angeles Times (screen capture below), and Voice of America.

The Jerusalem office park which houses Guatemala’s embassy

Multiple recent Reuters articles incorrectly report that moving the Brazilian embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem is a dramatic move away from the two-state solution. For instance, a Dec. 30 article, “Brazil moving its embassy to Jerusalem matter of ‘when, not if’: Netanyahu,” (Dec. 30) reported about the possible Brazilian move:

Such a move by Bolsonaro would be a sharp shift in Brazilian foreign policy, which has traditionally backed a two-stated solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

That piece appeared in Arabic as well.

A Dec. 31 article, “Bolsonaro takes office in Brazil, says nation ‘liberated from socialism,” took an even more extreme line, saying a Jerusalem embassy move would be a “break” from the two-state solution:

As a clear sign of that diplomatic shift, Bolsonaro plans to move the Brazilian embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, breaking with Brazil’s traditional support for a two-state solution to the Palestinian issue.

In fact, as is apparent from the cases of the American and Guatemalan embassies, relocation to Jerusalem is not a shift away from a two-state solution.

Daniel Shapiro, who served as Ambassador to Israel under President Obama, wrote in The Washington Post:

[N]othing about our embassy’s location there would prevent the emergence of a shared city with two capitals as part of a two-state solution. Perhaps inadvertently, President Trump’s decision has opened the door for much more frank discussion about an eventual Palestinian capital, and U.S. Embassy to Palestine, in East Jerusalem.

He explained:

West Jerusalem has served as Israel’s capital since the founding of the state, and no plausible two-state map would change that. Our embassy’s presence in the city reinforces the legitimacy of historic Jewish ties to the city, which are too often denied by Palestinians.

Indeed, as Reuters itself just reported, U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo recently expressed openness to a two-state solution (“Pompeo says US open to ‘two-party solution“):

U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo suggested on Monday he was open to a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian dispute, saying a “two-party solution” was likely in his first extensive comments on peace efforts since taking the job last week.

In addition, as Reuters reported Sept. 26: “Trump says he wants two-state solution for Middle East conflict.”

These lines are being written dozens of meters away from Guatemala’s embassy in southern Jerusalem. There is no evidence that Guatemala does not support a two-state solution.

Thus, there is no linkage between the location of a country’s embassy in Jerusalem and its policy vis-à-vis a two-state solution. The location of foreign embassies in Jerusalem does not preclude the future establishment of a Palestine state, even one whose capital lies in part of the holy city of Jerusalem.

Not on Trump’s travel ban list: Egypt, Afghanistan, ‘Palestine’

At least eight times in the last 14 years, The Los Angeles Times has corrected the inaccurate use of the term “Palestine,” but that fact did not stop the paper from again misusing the term.

Most recently, the Calendar article Friday (Dec. 7, page E4) by Mark Swed (online here), the article states:

With the house lights down, it was not possible to read the program and thus keep track of what came from Syria, Egypt, Afghanistan, Somalia, Palestine or elsewhere (“Kronos Quartet aims to transcend borders; The string group lines up pieces from ‘banned’ nations. The result: universal”).

On at least half a dozen occasions, The Los Angeles Times has corrected references to Palestine relating to Israel, the West Bank or the Gaza Strip, post 1948. Considering that the article last week is referring to the contemporary Palestinian music group Ramallah Underground (located in the West Bank), the reference to Palestine is inaccurate. The most recent correction, June 28, 2018 (also concerning a calendar article), stated:

German art exhibition: An article in the June 24 Arts & Books section about a German exhibition called “Unbuilding Walls” at the 2019 Venice (Italy) Architecture Biennale said it features video testimonials gathered by architects at border walls around the world, including Israel and Palestine. It should have said Palestinian territories.

Earlier corrections of the same error were:

“Roger Waters: An article in the June 22 Calendar section about Roger Waters’ new album said Waters supports Palestinians’ rights but incorrectly referred to tensions between Israel and Palestine. It should have said tensions between the Israeli government and the Palestinians” (June 28, 2017)

“Gerald A. Larue: In the Sept. 22 LATExtra section, the obituary of USC religious scholar Gerald A. Larue referred to archaeological digs in Palestine. The digs occurred in Israel and the West Bank.” (Sept. 22, 2014)

“Carter speech: An article in Friday’s California section included a subhead saying former President Carter urged students to travel to Palestine. The area referred to is the Palestinian territories.” (May 5, 2007)

“Istanbul Biennial — An article in the Dec. 11 Calendar section about an international art exhibition included Palestine in a list of nations from which artists had contributed works. It should have said the Palestinian territories.” (Dec. 23, 2005)

“Bail bonds investigation–An article in the California section Sunday about the arrest of American Liberty Bail Bonds owner Adnan ‘Dan’ Yousef and members of his family reported that they had ties to Palestine. The reference should have been to the Palestinians territories.” (Sept. 29, 2004)

“Palestinian film–Articles about Palm Springs International Film Festival that ran in Calendar on Dec. 20 and Jan. 8 referred to the movie ‘Divine Intervention’ as coming from Palestine. They should have said the Palestinian territories.” (Jan. 13, 2004)

Accurate language would have been to refer to music which came from “the Palestinian territories,” or “the Palestinian West Bank.”

Moreover, in a separate error in the Dec. 7 piece, the subheadline claims that “The string group lines up pieces from ‘banned’ nations,” and then goes on to discuss music from Egypt, Afghanistan and “Palestine” [sic], none of which was on the travel ban list. As The Los Angeles Times reported June 27, 2018 (“Justice vote to uphold president’s travel ban“):

The current ban covers five Muslim-majority nations — Iran, Libya, Somalia, Syria and Yemen — as well as North Korea and some government officials from Venezuela.

The digital headline of the online article likewise misleads: “Review: In defiance of Trump, Kronos Quartet plays music from banned countries.” An accurate headline would read: “Review: In defiance of Trump, Kronos Quarter plays music from Muslim-majority countries.”

CAMERA has contacted The Los Angeles Times about corrections. Stay tuned for an update.

Agence France Presse yesterday published a throwback headline, bringing us back to the period almost two years ago in which media outlets serially produced headlines which depicted Palestinian attackers as the victims.

The wire agency’s grossly misleading English-language headline yesterday was:

Palestinian in Jerusalem police station attack dies of wounds

As the article itself states, the Palestinian was actually the assailant — basic information that should have been made clear in the headline. The article begins:

A Palestinian teenager shot last week after attacking Israeli officers at a police station in annexed east Jerusalem died of his wounds on Tuesday, a hospital said.

“The terrorist from the incident in the Armon Hanatziv police station has died,” the Shaare Zedek hospital in Jerusalem said in a statement.

AFP’s French headline, in contrast, clearly identifies the Palestinian as the perpetrator of the Jerusalem police station attack. It states: “Jerusalem: a Palestinian assailant succumbs to his wounds (hospital).” (Translation by InfoEquitable.) The original French headline is:

Jérusalem: un assaillant palestinien succombe à ses blessures (hôpital)

Nov. 20 Update: New Yorker Corrects on Gaza Fisherman’s Death

After severely tripping up in its Gaza coverage earlier this year, The New Yorker — a publication ostensibly “known for its high standards” in fact-checking — once again failed to deliver accurate coverage.

In his Nov. 15 “Daily Comment,” Bernard Avishai wrote (“The Ceasefire in Gaza: A Turning Point for Hamas and Netanyahu“):

Yet it is anything but clear that the ceasefire will hold: during the agreement’s first hours, Israeli naval forces reportedly killed a young Gazan fisherman, ostensibly for sailing past the six-mile limit. (Emphasis added.)

Yet, according to both the Israeli military and the Hamas-controlled Gaza Health Ministry, Nawaf Ahmed Mohammed al-Attar was shot dead while on the beach. According to the Israeli military, he was shot dead for approaching the security fence. According to the Gaza fishermen’s union, he was shot dead while he was working on the beach. According to the Palestinian Center for Human Rights, on the other hand, he was in the water 100 meters off from the shore — well within the six nautical mile fishing zone — a claim contradicted by both the IDF and the Gaza Health Ministry. (There are 1,852 meters in a nautical mile.)

The Associated Press reported the day of the incident (“The Latest: Group says strikes damaged dozens of Gaza homes“):

4:40 p.m.

The Israeli military says a Gaza fisherman was killed by Israeli fire in northern Gaza Strip was illegally advancing toward the security fence dividing Gaza and Israel.

The military said in a statement that the army shot him Wednesday in adherence with military protocol for anyone approaching the fence at that range.

The fishermen’s union says the 20-year-old man was working on the beach near the land-maritime fence separating Gaza from Israel when he was shot in the stomach.

According to the Times of Israel:

A Gaza man was shot dead by Israeli troops Wednesday after approaching the security fence on the Israeli border, according to the Hamas-controlled Gaza health ministry, as tensions persisted after a ceasefire Tuesday ended some of the heaviest fighting in years.

The Israeli military confirmed that soldiers opened fire as a group of Palestinian men were spotted walking toward the border fence in the northern Gaza Strip, near the Israeli community of Kibbutz Zikim.

According to media reports, the suspect was shot as he continued approaching the fence despite warning shots being fired. . .

Palestinian media outlets reported that al-Attar had been killed at sea — something the IDF denied.

CAMERA has contacted The New Yorker to request a clarification. Stay tuned for an update.

Israeli journalist Sivan Rahav Meir reports in The Times of Israel today (“That Ultra-Orthodox flight delay? It didn’t happen“) that media claims, based on a Facebook post by Israeli rapper Chen Rotem, that a group of ultra-Orthodox men refusing to sit next to women delayed a flight for over an hour are not true. According to Meir, both a passenger on the flight and El Al dispute the claim, saying the bulk of the delay occurred even before passengers boarded, and that the seating delay lasted for approximately five minutes.

Passenger Katriel Shem-Tov wrote to Meir:

“Dear Sivan, I was on that flight from New York, the one that the media reported ‘took off an hour and a quarter late because of the Haredim.’ My wife and I celebrated our silver wedding anniversary and at 6 p.m., we were supposed to take off on our way home. However, before we even boarded, there was an announcement of a 45-minute delay and take-off would be at 6:45 p.m. The same information appeared on the screen in the departure lounge. Of course, the delay had nothing to do with any of the passengers.

“Boarding took a long time, ’till at least 7:10, I believe. My guess is that the whole business with the Haredim didn’t take more than five minutes. Of course, I am not justifying their behavior and one should not cause a delay of even one minute. I am Haredi myself, but I have never seen such behavior like theirs.

El Al told Meir:

The details that were reported about the incident were not accurate, to put it mildly. In actual fact, the delay was totally unconnected to the incident. The plane’s journey to the runway at the airport in New York took about one hour and had nothing to do with the incident. Taking care of the two passengers who refused to sit in their allocated places occurred after the plane had already left the gate and only took a few moments. We will continue to do our best to transport our customers safely, comfortably, and according to schedule.

According to Haaretz (“El Al Flight From N.Y. Delayed ‘After ultra-Orthodox Men Refuse to Sit Next to Women,'” June 23):

An El Al Israeli Airlines flight from New York to Tel Aviv was delayed last week by more than half an hour.

Such delays are not out of the ordinary, but the reason for this specific delay, according to an Israeli rapper who was aboard the flight, was the refusal of a group of ultra-Orthodox male passengers to sit next to women on the aircraft. . . .

Efforts by the flight crew to resolve the situation were initially unsuccessful and the men were only willing to speak to male members of the flight crew, Rotem wrote, adding that Orthodox or ultra-Orthodox male passengers expressed abhorrence at the four men’s conduct. Members of the crew threatened that if the four would not take their seats, they could disembark immediately, Rotem wrote.

“While on the El Al plane they were dealing with matters of practical theology and personal faith versus the rights of the individual and civil order, 12 planes from other carriers jumped the line ahead of Flight 002. The flight to Israel took off an hour and 15 minutes late.�?

One sentence in a page-one article of Haaretz’s‘s English print edition yesterday packed in multiple errors. Headlined “Netanyahu: Israel to close commercial Gaza crossing over airborne firebombs,” the article erred:

Palestinians began flying the devices into Israel after many weeks of protests at the Gaza-Israel border in which over 130 demonstrators were killed by Israel Defense Forces sharpshooters and some 4,000 were wounded by live fire.

This sentence is wrong on multiple counts.

First, as Haaretz itself has previously reported, the kite attacks began less than two weeks after the “March of Return” events began on March 30, not after “many weeks of protests at the Gaza-Israel border.” As Almog Ben Zikri reported April 16 (“Gazans Fly Firebombs Tied to Kites Into Israel, Sparking Several Blazes“):

Gaza Palestinians have begun flying kites with firebombs attached to them over the border fence into Israeli territory. Officials from the Eshkol region adjacent to the border informed residents on Sunday that the firebombs had caused several fires but had not caused injuries.

In the first incident last Wednesday [TS: ie April 11], a blaze was put out in the vicinity of Kibbutz Be’eri, where fire investigators found a burnt kite.

Two days later, on Friday, the Israeli army reported that demonstrators on the Gazan side of the border fence had attempted to fly a kite with a Molotov cocktail attached to it into Israeli territory. The kite fell to the ground in the Gaza Strip and caused no injuries.

On Saturday, a kite string was found in the vicinity of another fire near Kibbutz Be’eri. That was followed on Sunday by a kite in the colors of the Palestinian flag that fire investigators found at a blaze near Kibbutz Kissufim.

The Israeli army spokesman’s office said on Sunday that three kites with Molotov cocktails attached to them have been located, and that two of them started fires near the border fence.

Second, at the time that Palestinians started launching the kite attacks, at most 33 Palestinians had been killed and some 1000 reportedly wounded; not 130 and 4,000, respectively, as reported. As Ben Zikri reported (ibid):

Thirty-four Palestinians have been killed by Israeli army weapons fired near the border fence and more than 1,000 have been wounded by live weapons fire.

In last Friday’s protests, one Palestinian was killed and more than 230 wounded.

Third, even until now, it is not true that “130 demonstrators were killed,” because as even Hamas acknowledges, active and armed combatants were among the casualties. Among those killed were those who attacked Israelis with firebombs, gunfire, rocks, grenades and pipe bombs. On June 21, The Los Angeles Times corrected the identical error, stating:

Gaza kites: In the June 19 Section A, an article about the use of kites as weapons in the Gaza Strip said the Israeli military has killed about 130 protesters in Gaza. Those killed include armed militants, as well as one press photographer and one medic.

The error-ridden sentence does not appear in the online version of this article. Nor does it appear in the Hebrew edition. CAMERA alerted editors about the inaccuracies. As of this writing, they have yet to publish a correction.

Yesterday, Haaretz ran a news analysis by veteran reporter Chemi Shalev which, in part, castigated President Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu for depicting “the media’s reports and opinions . . . as ‘fake news'” (“By Bashing the Media, Trump and Netanyahu Foster Their Tribalist, Right-wing Support“). Ironically, Haaretz today published a correction about that very column, clarifying that “a quote was attributed erroneously to Justice Minister Ayelet Shaked, which she did not say.”

What exactly was the quote “which she did not say”? Shalev wrote:

Reacting to allegations made last year by Police Chief Roni Alsheikh that police officers investigating Netanyahu were being harassed and followed, Shaked noted that the police commander was “the new protected darling of the left and the media.”

But as Israeli journalist Amit Segal (of Channel 2 and Makor Rishon) tweeted, the quote, in fact, derives from an anonymous talkback to an article in Rotter, an Israeli news site, which mentions both Alsheikh and Shaked in the context of investigations of Netanyahu.

That Haaretz was compelled to correct a fake quote in a news analysis, which ironically dismissed complaints about “fake news” as a deplorable political ploy, is reminiscent of a recent New York Times correction later dubbed “the correction of the year.”

Haaretz deleted the fake quote from its digital article, but, contrary to standard journalistic practice, did not alert readers to the change.

A New York Times caption which definitively claims that Layla Ghandour “fell ill after inhaling tear gas,” despite the fact that the accompanying article itself acknowledges that the story involving tear gas was disputed

Western media outlets have largely ignored a significant development in the story of eight-month-old Layla al-Ghandour of the Gaza Strip, whose May 15 death was widely reported when her family claimed that she accidentally ended up at the border clashes and was killed by Israel’s use of tear gas. According to the indictment of Layla’s relative, Mahmoud Omar, Hamas paid the family to claim that tear gas caused her death though the real culprit was a blood condition, which also killed her brother the year before.

According to Haaretz (“Hamas Paid Gaza Family $2,200 to Blame Israel for Baby’s Death, Indictment Says“):

Under interrogation in Israel, Omar, who is Layla al-Ghandour’s cousin, said Hamas leader Sinwar paid the baby’s family 8,000 shekels ($2,200) to accuse Israel of the death of the 8-month-old. The claim came despite the fact that members of the family had previously said that she died of a blood disorder, a condition that the baby’s six-month-old brother apparently also died of last year.

When news surfaced of the claim that Layla al-Ghandour had died from inhaling tear gas, Israeli army officials cast doubt on the allegation, saying that the army had evidence that called the family’s claim into question.

According to the indictment against Omar, on the day that Layla al-Ghandour died, Omar’s mother called him while he was participating in a demonstration near the border fence and told him about the child’s death. Omar is said to have been told on returning home that the baby had died of the same blood disease that took the life of her brother.

Numerous media outlets which dedicated entire stories to the disputed circumstances of Layla’s death, and others which unequivocally blamed it on tear gas, despite the fact that the Associated Press had reported that a Gaza doctor noted the preexisting condition and expressed doubt that she was killed by tear gas, have ignored the new information concerning Hamas’ alleged payment to the family.

Exceptions to the vast majority of Western media outlets which ignored the development, UPI and Agence France Presse did commendably report that Omar said Hamas leader Yihya Sinwar paid his family to falsely blame Layla’s death on tear gas.

June 20 Update: Multiple Media Outlets Amend Captions Calling Gaza Arsonists ‘Activists’

Numerous Agence France-Presse photo captions in the last couple of days misidentify Gazans responsible for airborne arson attacks which destroyed 28,000 dunums of Israeli farmland and nature reserve land. The smoke from these deliberately set fires two days ago caused 1000 turkeys to choke to death. The arsonists also launched explosives-laden kites and balloons across the border, reaching a highway and even the roof of a home.

AFP captions misidentified these serial arsonists as “activists” or “protesters.” A sampling of these erroneous captions follows:

Palestinian activists fill hilum [sic] gas in a ballon [sic] that will be attached to flammable materials to be flown toward Israel, at the Israel-Gaza border, in Rafah in the southern Gaza Strip on June 17, 2018. SAID KHATIB / AFP

A Palestinian protester holds a bag containing with flammable materials that will be attached to ballons [sic] and flown toward Israel, at the Israel-Gaza border, in Rafah in the southern Gaza Strip on June 17, 2018.
SAID KHATIB / AFP

An Israeli man and a boy extinguish a fire in a filed next to Kibbutz Beeri reportedly caused by inflamable [sic] material attached to kites and flown across the border to Israel by activists in the Gaza strip on June 18, 2018. Kite-borne fire bombings have reportedly caused significant damage to Israeli fields.
MENAHEM KAHANA / AFP

“Arson” refers to the very specific crime of purposefully setting property on fire, which is precisely what these people are doing. But AFP did not once use this clear and accurate terminology, and instead opts for the misleading and grossly inaccurate terms: “activists” and “protesters.”

Haaretz‘s English print edition yesterday published one of the AFP captions which had referred to “A masked Palestinian activist launches a balloon with flammable material . . . ” Haaretz editors went to the trouble of amending the caption: changing the wording from “activist” to “protester.”

See also: “CAMERA Prompts Improved Reuters Captions on Palestinian Arson Attacks,” June 5