Tag: nyt

Mrs. Alito and the Bad Flag

The New York Times apoplectic over basically nothing: “At Justice Alito’s House, a ‘Stop the Steal’ Symbol on Display,” reads a New York Times headline from yesterday.

According to the Times, an upside-down American flag was flown at Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito’s house for a few days in January 2021—between the January 6 Capitol riot and President Joe Biden’s inauguration. The nation’s esteemed paper of record suggests this action indicates that Alito thinks the election was stolen from former President Donald Trump.

There is very little evidence available to make this case. People fly upside-down flags for all kinds of reasons; it typically signals “SOS” or a sense that the country is horribly off course. People have historically flown flags in this manner out of protest for the Vietnam War, out of protest for the Supreme Court’s 2022 decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, to contest election results (believing the election was stolen or that voter fraud was rampant), or—and don’t get the two confused—to signal displeasure with the election results.

Alito reports that his wife was the one who flew the flag in this manner and that it concerned a dispute with a neighbor who posted an anti-Trump sign in their yard, following the election, that used expletives. Mrs. Alito was reportedly angered by this, and flew her flag upside-down in response. It is very hard to tell what intentions were behind one single gesture, reportedly not even done by the justice himself, and no account from neighbors or friends of the Alito family has bolstered the idea that Mrs. Alito is a “Stop the Steal” type.

This reminds me of when media outlets and the Anti-Defamation League claimed the “OK” symbol was actually a white supremacist gesture. If you look hard enough, you can find disturbing symbols anywhere you look, but you must sometimes suspend logic and reason in order to do so. This does not seem like a situation where a sitting Supreme Court justice is supporting overthrowing election results; it looks like a situation where The New York Times is straining to make that the narrative.

Keep reading

Cruelty of Language: Leaked NY Times Memo Reveals Anti-Palestinian Bias of US Media

The New York Times coverage of the Israeli carnage in Gaza, like that of other mainstream US media, is a disgrace to journalism.

This assertion should not surprise anyone. US media is driven neither by facts nor morality, but by agendas, calculating and power-hungry. The humanity of 120 thousand dead and wounded Palestinians because of the Israeli genocide in Gaza is simply not part of that agenda.

In a report – based on a leaked memo from the New York Times – the Intercept found out that the so-called US newspaper of record has been feeding its journalists with frequently updated ‘guidelines’ on what words to use, or not use, when describing the horrific Israeli mass slaughter in the Gaza Strip, starting on October 7.

In fact, most of the words used in the paragraph above would not be fit to print in the NYT, according to its ‘guidelines’.

Shockingly, internationally recognized terms and phrases such as ‘genocide’, ‘occupied territory’, ‘ethnic cleansing’ and even ‘refugee camps’, were on the newspaper’s rejection list.

It gets even more cruel. “Words like ‘slaughter’, ‘massacre’ and ‘carnage’ often convey more emotion than information. Think hard before using them in our own voice,” according to the memo, leaked and verified by the Intercept and other independent media.

Though such language control is, according to the NYT, aimed at fairness for ‘all sides’, their application was almost entirely one-sided. For example, a previous Intercept report showed that the American newspaper had, between October 7 and November 14, mentioned the word ‘massacre’ 53 times when it referred to Israelis being killed by Palestinians and only once in reference to Palestinians being killed by Israel.

Keep reading

LEAKED NYT GAZA MEMO TELLS JOURNALISTS TO AVOID WORDS “GENOCIDE,” “ETHNIC CLEANSING,” AND “OCCUPIED TERRITORY”

THE NEW YORK TIMES instructed journalists covering Israel’s war on the Gaza Strip to restrict the use of the terms “genocide” and “ethnic cleansing” and to “avoid” using the phrase “occupied territory” when describing Palestinian land, according to a copy of an internal memo obtained by The Intercept.

The memo also instructs reporters not to use the word Palestine “except in very rare cases” and to steer clear of the term “refugee camps” to describe areas of Gaza historically settled by displaced Palestinians expelled from other parts of Palestine during previous Israeli–Arab wars. The areas are recognized by the United Nations as refugee camps and house hundreds of thousands of registered refugees.

The memo — written by Times standards editor Susan Wessling, international editor Philip Pan, and their deputies — “offers guidance about some terms and other issues we have grappled with since the start of the conflict in October.”

While the document is presented as an outline for maintaining objective journalistic principles in reporting on the Gaza war, several Times staffers told The Intercept that some of its contents show evidence of the paper’s deference to Israeli narratives.

Keep reading

NYT’s Morning Newsletter Blames Everyone but Israel for Israeli Crimes

With over 17 million subscribers, the Morning, the New York Times’ flagship newsletter, is by far the most popular newsletter in the English-speaking world. (It has almost three times as many subscribers as the next most popular newsletter.)

Since October 7, as Israel has waged an unprecedented war on Palestinian children, journalists, hospitals and schools, the New York Times’ highly influential newsletter has bent over backwards to blame everyone but Israel for the carnage.

Waging a legitimate war

According to the Morning—led by head writer David Leonhardt—Israel’s war on Gaza is a targeted operation designed to eliminate Hamas. The Morning propagates this narrative despite well-documented declarations of collective punishment and even genocidal intent by high-ranking Israeli officials—a tendency that South Africa has forcefully documented in their case before the ICJ (UN, 12/29/23). Israeli President Isaac Herzog’s comments on October 12, 2023, are typical: “It’s an entire nation out there that is responsible. It’s not true, this rhetoric about civilians not aware, not involved.”

This sentiment has been echoed by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, multiple cabinet-level ministers and senior military officials. Speaking from a devastated northern Gaza, one top Israeli army official said (UN, 12/29/23): “Whoever returns here, if they return here after, will find scorched earth. No houses, no agriculture, no nothing. They have no future.”

Keep reading

NY Times Plays CIA Messenger — Turn Off The Lights, The Party Is Over

I apologize on not writing about the NY Times article by  Adam Entous and Michael Schwirtz, The Spy War: How the C.I.A. Secretly Helps Ukraine Fight Putin, before now but my schedule did not give me the time I needed to do the subject justice. I was inundated with requests for a comment by several media outlets and did my best to accommodate those in radio and TV interviews.

The key thing you need to understand is that this article is a deliberate piece of misinformation that is intended to shape public and policymaking opinion in the United States. The following opening to the article, like all propaganda, is a mixture of fact and fantasy.

the intelligence partnership between Washington and Kyiv is a linchpin of Ukraine’s ability to defend itself. The C.I.A. and other American intelligence agencies provide intelligence for targeted missile strikes, track Russian troop movements and help support spy networks.

But the partnership is no wartime creation, nor is Ukraine the only beneficiary.

It took root a decade ago, coming together in fits and starts under three very different U.S. presidents, pushed forward by key individuals who often took daring risks. It has transformed Ukraine, whose intelligence agencies were long seen as thoroughly compromised by Russia, into one of Washington’s most important intelligence partners against the Kremlin today.

Yes, it is true that U.S. intelligence, along with NATO, supplied Ukraine with intelligence used to carry out missile strikes on Russian positions. Admitting this in the pages of the NY Times is reckless and dangerous. I am pretty sure the Russians already knew this but putting this on the record with U.S. intelligence sources is a casus belli for Russia. Can you imagine the reaction if Russian intelligence confirmed they provided intel to a group or country that attacked the U.S.? Do you think Washington would ignore that and not seek retribution? Of course not.

But the article starts with the big lie by claiming that the CIA relationship with Ukraine started in February 2022 and then piles on with these two whoppers:

Before the war, the Ukrainians proved themselves to the Americans by collecting intercepts that helped prove Russia’s involvement in the 2014 downing of a commercial jetliner, Malaysia Airlines Flight 17. The Ukrainians also helped the Americans go after the Russian operatives who meddled in the 2016 U.S. presidential election.

The Maidan and the ensuing events in February and March 2014 involved what I believe was a joint U.S./U.K. intelligence operation to remove Ukraine’s President Yanukovich and install a pro-Western government that would be used to attack Russia. The fact of the matter is that the CIA has been dealing with Ukrainian opponents of Russia since at least 1947.

The propaganda purpose of the article is revealed by the decision of the reporters to repeat the specious claims that Russia shot down Malaysia Airlines flight 17 and that Russia “meddled” in the 2016 U.S. Presidential election. We have had a slew of revelations over the last two months, principally from Matt Taibbi and Michael Schellenberger, showing that it was the Clinton campaign with the help of the CIA and the FBI who meddled in the 2016 Presidential campaign in a failed effort to defeat Donald Trump. Entous and Schwirtz insert the bogus claim that Ukraine fingered the Russian officer responsible for “election interference.”

Keep reading

The New York Times Implausibly Implicates Oklahoma’s Bathroom Law in the Death of a Nonbinary Student

Nex Benedict, a 16-year-old Oklahoma student who identified as nonbinary and preferred they/them pronouns, died on February 8, a day after a fight at Owasso High School. It is unclear whether the injuries that Nex suffered in the fight contributed to their death. But in a story published on Wednesday, The New York Times implicitly blames the altercation on an Oklahoma law that requires students to use restrooms that correspond with the sex “identified on the individual’s original birth certificate.” Details that the Times omitted cast doubt on that framing, which The Independent also pushed in a story headlined “Oklahoma Banned Trans Students From Bathrooms. Now a Bullied Student Is Dead After a Fight.”

Nex, whose given name was Dagny, was biologically female, and the fight happened in a girls’ bathroom, where Nex and another student reportedly were assaulted by “three older female students.” Although Nex apparently was bullied for identifying as nonbinary, it looks like the location of the fight was incidental.

That is not the impression left by the Times story. “Anti-Trans Policies Draw Scrutiny After 16-Year-Old’s Death in Oklahoma,” says the headline. The subhead adds that “the student, who did not identify as male or female, according to their family, died a day after an altercation in a school bathroom.” The story is illustrated by a photo of transgender rights activists during a 2023 demonstration at the Oklahoma Capitol. “Under state law,” the caption notes, “students must use the bathroom that aligns with their birth gender.”

Even though that is what Nex was doing at the time of the fight, the second paragraph again cites the law as if it explains the altercation: “Under an Oklahoma law passed in 2022, students must use the bathrooms that align with their birth gender.” The next paragraph notes that the fight happened “in a girls’ bathroom at Owasso High School” but does not acknowledge that Nex was complying with the bathroom law, perhaps because that would require acknowledging Nex’s “birth gender.” Although that information is clearly relevant in this context, the story does not mention it at all.

Reporters J. David Goodman and Edgar Sandoval return to the subject of state policy later in the story:

The death renewed scrutiny of anti-transgender laws passed in the state and rhetoric by Oklahoma officials, including the state superintendent for education, Ryan Walters, whose agency has been forceful in trying to bar what it calls “radical gender theory” in schools.

“It’s dangerous,” Mr. Walters said in a video made by the agency last year. “It puts our girls in jeopardy.”

The video highlighted a fight in a bathroom the previous year in which, according to a lawsuit, a female student was “severely” injured in a fight with a transgender student.

Advocates for nonbinary and transgender students said that the state’s policy on gender and bathrooms had led to more reports of confrontations in schools.

“That policy and the messaging around it has led to a lot more policing of bathrooms by students,” said Nicole McAfee, the executive director of Freedom Oklahoma, which advocates for transgender and gay rights. Students who do not present themselves as obviously male or female find themselves questioned by other students, they said. “There is a sense of, ‘do you belong in here?'”

The cause of Nex’s death remains unclear. The New York Post reports that Sue Benedict, Nex’s mother, said Nex fell and hit their head during the bathroom fight. The Post also quotes the mother of the other victim, who reported seeing the assailants “beating her head across the floor.” But according to a statement that the Owasso Police Department posted on Facebook yesterday, preliminary autopsy findings indicate that Nex “did not die as a result of trauma.” The statement adds that “toxicology results and other ancillary testing results” are still pending and “the official autopsy report will be available at a later date.”

Keep reading

Elon Musk Is Right and The NY Times Is Wrong About Illegal Voting by Non-Citizens

In a recent trio of posts to X, Elon Musk wrote that (1) illegal immigrants “are not prevented from voting in federal elections,” (2) “you don’t need government issued ID to vote,” and (3) Democrats “are importing voters.”

To rebut those statements, The New York Times (NYT) published an article by Jim Rutenberg and Kate Conger claiming that Mr. Musk is “spreading election misinformation” about “illegal voting by noncitizens” and echoing a “conspiracy theory” spread by former President Donald Trump.

Although Mr. Musk’s words are imprecise, the gist of what he wrote is correct, and The NYT is categorically wrong.

Keep reading

New York Times Publishes Op-Ed Calling for Biden to Step Aside and Allow Another Democrat to Run

The New York Times has published an opinion piece calling for Joe Biden to step aside and allow another Democrat to run in 2024.

The article by Ross Douthat was titled “The Question Is Not If Biden Should Step Aside. It’s How.”

Douthat began by pointing to the special counsel report released Thursday that found Biden had mishandled classified documents, but should not be charged, at least in part, because of his failing memory.

The report referred to him as an “elderly man with a poor memory” and “significant limitations.”

“Joe Biden should not be running for re-election,” Douthat’s article began. “That much was obvious well before the special prosecutor’s comments on the president’s memory lapses inspired a burst of age-related angst. And Democrats who are furious at the prosecutor have to sense that it will become only more obvious as we move deeper into an actual campaign.”

The writer explained that he does not necessarily believe that Biden is currently unfit for the presidency, but that he may not be during a second term.

“Saying that things have worked OK throughout this stage of Biden’s decline, though, is very different from betting that they can continue working out OK for almost five long further years,” the article continued. “And saying that Biden is capable of occupying the presidency for the next 11 months is quite different from saying that he’s capable of spending those months effectively campaigning for the right to occupy it again.”

Keep reading

NYT Engages in Front-Page IDF ‘Womenwashing’

If you read the Global Times, an English-language daily owned by China’s Communist Party, you will catch stories about the forward-thinking gender politics of the People’s Liberation Army. Just last year (2/21/23), readers found out that the PLA is recruiting “female carrier-based aircraft pilots for the first time,” and before that (4/9/19), the paper bragged that women in the PLA are “showing valor and fortitude no less than men.”

The paper (7/15/19) hailed “10 women who hurdled the training as operators of the country’s most advanced tank,” reporting that internet commentators called them “modern-day Mulans.” It even ran a photo spread (12/19/13) of the “Beautiful Female Soldiers of the PLA” with the help of China’s state wire service, Xinhua.

In the West, articles like these tend to be disregarded as government advertising that sugarcoats the country’s military expansion by portraying it as some kind of social progress. Because the paper is party-owned, and China ranks 179 out of 180 on Reporters Without Borders’ press freedom index, it’s hard not to be skeptical of these pieces’ intentions.

Keep reading

Screams without proof: questions for NYT about shoddy ‘Hamas mass rape’ report

The Grayzone has identified  serious issues with the credibility of key sources quoted in the New York Times’ December 28 story, “Screams Without Words: How Hamas Weaponized Sexual Violence on October 7.” Authored by Jeffrey Gettleman, Anat Schwartz, and Adam Sella, the article purports to prove “a broader pattern of gender-based violence on Oct. 7” than even Israeli authorities have been willing to allege . However, the Times report is marred by sensationalism, wild leaps of logic, and an absence of concrete evidence to support its sweeping conclusion.

The Times has come under fire from family members of Gal Abdush, the so-called “girl in the black dress” who features as Exhibit A in Gettleman and company’s attempt to demonstrate a pattern of rape by Hamas on October 7. Not only have Abdush’s sister and brother-in-law each denied that she was raped, the former has accused the Times of manipulating her family into participating by misleading them about their editorial angle. Though the family’s comments have sparked a major uproar on social media, the Times has yet to address the serious breach of journalistic integrity that its staff is accused of committing.

Keep reading