

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.

Once again, Israel has launched attacks on the open-air prison called Gaza. Once again, the New York Times has distorted its coverage to try and reduce Israel's guilt. The Times used the following standard techniques in today's online story by David Halbfinger:
Distort the timeline to try and blame the Palestinians. The Times recounts yesterday's latest news: Israeli airstrikes that killed 2 Gazans and mortar fire from Gaza that wounded 4 Israelis. But the paper nowhere mentions that 5 days earlier, on July 9, Israel had further choked off cargo shipments into Gaza, a territory which was already under a punishing blockade -- a drastic act that any neutral observer might have concluded contributed greatly to the latest escalation.
Spend more time on Israeli victims than on Palestinian ones
Spend more time on Israeli victims than on Palestinian ones. Today's online article has 6 full paragraphs on Israelis in the town of Sderot who were hurt by rockets or mortars. Three different Israelis were quoted, including one, Refael Yifrah, who said, "It's better to be in Gaza where they get warning that they're going to be fired upon in one neighborhood or another and they evacuate. . . Here, there's an alert, no one knows where it going to land."
By contrast, the Times cited only one Palestinian by name, even though the paper has two reporters in Gaza City. The Times did report that Muhammad Abdelaal, a 30-year-old, "was interviewed at Shifa Hospital while soaked with blood and being treated for his wounds" -- but, unlike the Israelis, he apparently didn't say anything quotable.
Don't challenge Israel's framing of the events. The Times headline calls yesterday's exchange the "Most Intense Fighting Since 2014 War" -- without quotation marks. In fairness, the first sentence of the report does make clear that the "most intense" assessment comes straight from Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. But Israeli soldiers have shot dead at least 137 Gazans in the months-long Great March of Return and wounded more than 4000. Israeli snipers murdering un- or barely-armed protesters hardly qualifies as "fighting," but it has certainly been more "intense" than yesterday's events. Clearly Netanyahu wanted to distract world attention from those 137 dead Palestinians, and the thousands more wounded -- and the New York Times let him get away with it.
(There is one minor mystery. The version of the Times report that appears on page 12 of the print edition this morning is moderately less biased: no headline about "Most Intense Fighting," less coverage of the Israeli victims. Maybe the print editors are more aware of the blistering criticism that Times articles have gotten in recent months? Of course, many more readers will see the online version.)
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Once again, Israel has launched attacks on the open-air prison called Gaza. Once again, the New York Times has distorted its coverage to try and reduce Israel's guilt. The Times used the following standard techniques in today's online story by David Halbfinger:
Distort the timeline to try and blame the Palestinians. The Times recounts yesterday's latest news: Israeli airstrikes that killed 2 Gazans and mortar fire from Gaza that wounded 4 Israelis. But the paper nowhere mentions that 5 days earlier, on July 9, Israel had further choked off cargo shipments into Gaza, a territory which was already under a punishing blockade -- a drastic act that any neutral observer might have concluded contributed greatly to the latest escalation.
Spend more time on Israeli victims than on Palestinian ones
Spend more time on Israeli victims than on Palestinian ones. Today's online article has 6 full paragraphs on Israelis in the town of Sderot who were hurt by rockets or mortars. Three different Israelis were quoted, including one, Refael Yifrah, who said, "It's better to be in Gaza where they get warning that they're going to be fired upon in one neighborhood or another and they evacuate. . . Here, there's an alert, no one knows where it going to land."
By contrast, the Times cited only one Palestinian by name, even though the paper has two reporters in Gaza City. The Times did report that Muhammad Abdelaal, a 30-year-old, "was interviewed at Shifa Hospital while soaked with blood and being treated for his wounds" -- but, unlike the Israelis, he apparently didn't say anything quotable.
Don't challenge Israel's framing of the events. The Times headline calls yesterday's exchange the "Most Intense Fighting Since 2014 War" -- without quotation marks. In fairness, the first sentence of the report does make clear that the "most intense" assessment comes straight from Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. But Israeli soldiers have shot dead at least 137 Gazans in the months-long Great March of Return and wounded more than 4000. Israeli snipers murdering un- or barely-armed protesters hardly qualifies as "fighting," but it has certainly been more "intense" than yesterday's events. Clearly Netanyahu wanted to distract world attention from those 137 dead Palestinians, and the thousands more wounded -- and the New York Times let him get away with it.
(There is one minor mystery. The version of the Times report that appears on page 12 of the print edition this morning is moderately less biased: no headline about "Most Intense Fighting," less coverage of the Israeli victims. Maybe the print editors are more aware of the blistering criticism that Times articles have gotten in recent months? Of course, many more readers will see the online version.)
Once again, Israel has launched attacks on the open-air prison called Gaza. Once again, the New York Times has distorted its coverage to try and reduce Israel's guilt. The Times used the following standard techniques in today's online story by David Halbfinger:
Distort the timeline to try and blame the Palestinians. The Times recounts yesterday's latest news: Israeli airstrikes that killed 2 Gazans and mortar fire from Gaza that wounded 4 Israelis. But the paper nowhere mentions that 5 days earlier, on July 9, Israel had further choked off cargo shipments into Gaza, a territory which was already under a punishing blockade -- a drastic act that any neutral observer might have concluded contributed greatly to the latest escalation.
Spend more time on Israeli victims than on Palestinian ones
Spend more time on Israeli victims than on Palestinian ones. Today's online article has 6 full paragraphs on Israelis in the town of Sderot who were hurt by rockets or mortars. Three different Israelis were quoted, including one, Refael Yifrah, who said, "It's better to be in Gaza where they get warning that they're going to be fired upon in one neighborhood or another and they evacuate. . . Here, there's an alert, no one knows where it going to land."
By contrast, the Times cited only one Palestinian by name, even though the paper has two reporters in Gaza City. The Times did report that Muhammad Abdelaal, a 30-year-old, "was interviewed at Shifa Hospital while soaked with blood and being treated for his wounds" -- but, unlike the Israelis, he apparently didn't say anything quotable.
Don't challenge Israel's framing of the events. The Times headline calls yesterday's exchange the "Most Intense Fighting Since 2014 War" -- without quotation marks. In fairness, the first sentence of the report does make clear that the "most intense" assessment comes straight from Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. But Israeli soldiers have shot dead at least 137 Gazans in the months-long Great March of Return and wounded more than 4000. Israeli snipers murdering un- or barely-armed protesters hardly qualifies as "fighting," but it has certainly been more "intense" than yesterday's events. Clearly Netanyahu wanted to distract world attention from those 137 dead Palestinians, and the thousands more wounded -- and the New York Times let him get away with it.
(There is one minor mystery. The version of the Times report that appears on page 12 of the print edition this morning is moderately less biased: no headline about "Most Intense Fighting," less coverage of the Israeli victims. Maybe the print editors are more aware of the blistering criticism that Times articles have gotten in recent months? Of course, many more readers will see the online version.)