223
Republicans and Democrats differ drastically in which news sources they trust and distrust
(www.pewresearch.org)
This is for strictly mildly interesting material. If it's too interesting, it doesn't belong. If it's not interesting, it doesn't belong.
This is obviously an objective criteria, so the mods are always right. Or maybe mildly right? Ahh.. what do we know?
Just post some stuff and don't spam.
The NYT has also published many pieces demonizing Palestinians and downplaying Israeli war crimes. It even helped Israeli intelligence assets spread allegations about sexual violence on October 7 that couldn't be verified by other Journalists, human rights groups or the UN, but helped strongly in distracting from well documented and evidenced sexual violence by Israelis against Palestinians they have taken hostage.
The NYTs defends the piece to this day, despite acknowledging:
"In February 2024, Schwartz was found to have liked incendiary posts on social media, including one calling to "turn the strip into a slaughterhouse", "violate any norm, on the way to victory", and that read "Those in front of us are human animals who do not hesitate to violate minimal rules."[2][23][24] The Times launched an investigation.[23] The Times was reviewing Schwartz's social media posts, and made a preliminary statement that such activity breaches company policy.[23][5] Schwartz subsequently locked and deleted her social media posts."
The NYT also simped for the Iraq invasion and bullied out their former Middle East bureau chief Chris Hedges, because he dared to criticize that illegal war of aggression.
As for the role of the NYT in maintaining support for the Vietnam war and downplaying US involvement with far right extremist and fascist terror organizations and dictators in Central and South America, i recommend you to read "Manufacturing consent", which provides detailed evidence of how the NYT is part of the corporate media that ensures consent for US crimes against humanity and international law all around the world.
What you are doing is called moving the goal post. But I'll answer.
1. Hamas is not "The Palestinians". Saying Hamas committed bad things doesn't mean "demonizing palestinians".
2. The french media confirmed there were acts of sexual abuse on October 7. This is a very strange hill to die on.
3. The NYT has published stunning investigations into Israeli crimes:
https://www.nytimes.com/video/world/middleeast/100000005933727/israel-gaza-medic-killed-rouzan-najjar.html
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/06/world/middleeast/gaza-medics-killed-israel.html
4. She wasn't a NYT journalist. She was a freelancer. She helped make the movie "Waltz with Bashir" and was described as a leftist. Her Facebook profile picture declared in Arabic that "Jews and Arabs refuse to be enemies'". The like was in question was posted on October 7. Upon learning this, on March 2024, the NYT ended her employment.
5. You are quoting The Intercept. That small newspaper also has reporters involved in ethical scandals. You want me to list them all?
6. The New York Times has published opinion pieces by several Palestinians and Israelis.
Palestinian: https://www.nytimes.com/2023/10/25/opinion/palestine-war-empathy.html
Israeli: https://www.nytimes.com/2024/01/10/opinion/israel-war-hamas-sderot.html
Palestinian: https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/14/opinion/israel-gaza-war-history.html
Israeli: https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/07/opinion/israel-democracy-netanyahu-war.html
Palestinian: https://www.nytimes.com/2023/10/19/opinion/israel-netanyahu-palestinians.html
Israeli: https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/01/opinion/gaza-war-holocaust-shoah.html
Palestinian: https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/21/opinion/palestine-leadership-war-israel.html
Benjamin Netanyahu doesn't like New York Times very much.
From december 2022:
https://www.foxnews.com/media/netanyahu-shreds-new-york-times-demonizing-israel-decades-after-scathing-editorial
i was providing evidence why the NYT is agenda driven. As for how they hide it, i already recommended you to read "Manufacturing Consent" where this is analyzed in detail.
Now you are moving goal posts and ignoring the fundamental problem. Also you selectively focus on the intercept, when multiple media outlets have investigated the NYT piece and found severe problems.
There is a substantial difference between factual reporting on sexual violence and letting a "former" intelligence officer who calls for genocide to completely fabricate cases and become unhinged in her claims. This also amounted to psychological violence against victims and family members who had to come out and deny the fabrications made by the New York Times. Imagine your family member is being murdered and a ruthless "former" intelligence officer is spreading inventions to make it more gruesome than it was and people being bullied to lie about it in order to support the governments propaganda efforts.
Again, i feel like the gravity of it cannot be understated. This piece was clearly a propaganda piece to help Israel maintain its image as the ICJ demanded measures to be taken by Israel to prevent committing genocide against Palestinians. Even as the evidence came in, the NYT doubled down, despite full well knowing who and what it does propaganda for with this piece.
The fact that the NYT occasionally lets Palestinian voices be heard only serves as a veil to create the idea of being unbiased. Again this is something that is well analyzed in "Manufacturing consent" and it isn't exclusive to the NYT. Most corporate media acts in similar fashion.
The United Nations special representative Pramila Patten released her full report on sexual assaults on October 7.
https://www.un.org/sexualviolenceinconflict/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/report/mission-report-official-visit-of-the-office-of-the-srsg-svc-to-israel-and-the-occupied-west-bank-29-january-14-february-2024/20240304-Israel-oWB-CRSV-report.pdf
She concluded that sexual violence did indeed take place. The NYT didn't publish anything false.
The fact Hamas committed bad thing doesn't mean the NYT vilified Palestinians.
The NYT told the story of a Palestinian grandmother who refuses to leave her home in Gaza during bombardments because she already lost her home once, in 1948:
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/10/25/world/middleeast/gaza-diaspora-families.html
The NYT wrote stories about a Palestinian child orphaned by the air strike that killed dozens of her family members :
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/18/world/middleeast/gaza-children-israel.html
There's no story that is more fiercely contested than Israel-Palestine drama , more mired in competing zero-sum narratives. It is nearly impossible to produce fair, accurate coverage without making all sides angry.
I'm not sure what you are trying to say with "couldn't be verified by other journalists". The specific event discussed at the start of that section concerns an alleged rape that was not witnessed by a NYT reporter presonally. The evidence for it wasn't believed by some of her family, at least initially. That unfortunately seems fairly common for rape victims. Other descriptions about what happened that day were also from witness testimony, so it makes sense that details would disagree. It's expected to be fairly unreliable as evidence, but not to the extent it shouldn't be reported on.
Do you consider reports of sexual violence to be Israeli propaganda? Because while Hamas has denied that its fighters committed any sexual assaults, the UN has reported there was "a pattern indicative of sexual violence by Palestinian forces during the attack". The unverified part of the claim by Israel is not that it happened, but whether it was actually ordered by Hamas rather than just being opportunistic individuals. For the record, the UN has similarly reported Israeli forces doing the same to Palestinians with at least implicit encouragement from leadership following Oct. 7.
Does moving the goalpost mean that you agree that the nyt is pro middle class now?