We, a collective of independent U.S. journalists, writers, and media makers, write with deep disappointment regarding The New York Times’ coverage of the current military assault in Gaza, as well as its ongoing reporting on the Palestine-Israel conflict and its broader context. As loyal readers/subscribers, we expect balanced and unbiased reporting, yet recent articles have fallen short of these standards.
An extensive review of A1 articles published between October 8 and November 24, 2023 has revealed a pattern of language, context, and source perspective issues that consistently favor the Israeli narrative over the Palestinian. This bias, evident in the lack of contextualization and dehumanizing language, not only undermines the integrity of NYT’s journalism but also perpetuates violence against Palestinians and obstructs their struggle for self-determination and freedom from occupation.
For context, since October 8, Gaza has witnessed the deaths of over 28,000 civilians, half of whom are women and children. Additionally, more than 100 journalists have been directly targeted, marking the highest toll in any conflict according to the CPJ. Furthermore, 1.2 million Palestinians in the Gaza Strip have been displaced to an area under heavy shelling, facing famine due to blocked humanitarian assistance and escalating infectious disease rates amid dwindling healthcare facilities.
While many of these issues have been reported in NYT’s A1 coverage, much remains inadequately addressed. Therefore, we present a summary of our findings and sources, accompanied by our demands.
Take Action
Email NYT editors using the button above or the text below!
Dear [Editor’s Name],
I’m writing to express my deep concern over your coverage of the military assault in Gaza and the broader Palestine-Israel issue. The analysis of an independent collective of U.S. journalists, writers, and media makers found a consistent favoring of the Israeli perspective. The instances noted in this research undermine our expected standards of balanced and unbiased journalism and the journalistic ethics principle to minimize harm.
The analysis of over 90 articles published on A1 between October 8 to November 24, 2023, reveals significant issues, including:
- Lack of historical context preceding the October 7 attack.
- Selective reporting on the ongoing humanitarian crisis.
- Use of language that downplays civilian casualties.
- Reframing a man-made humanitarian crisis as a strategic objective.
- Lack of accountability conveyed through passive language.
- Bias in fueling sympathy for one side over another.
- Double standards on source credibility.
- Uneven fact verification.
- Minimization of Palestinian suffering relative to Israeli suffering and death.
- Questioning the credibility of Palestinian sources regarding the death toll.
These patterns suggest a departure from journalistic integrity, indirectly supporting violence against Palestinians, and affecting public perception and policy when it comes to naming this U.S.-backed Israeli genocide of Gaza.
Despite previous alerts from independent groups, news outlets, and individuals, there seems to be no corrective action from the NYT editorial board. We recall the board’s 2004 apology for its pre-Iraq war coverage, recognizing the paper’s culpability in promoting problematic coverage of the U.S. occupation of Iraq.
We urge the NYT to:
- Conduct a thorough internal review of your reporting, using the issues we’ve identified as a starting point.
- Issue a comprehensive editor’s letter outlining necessary corrections to this reporting.
- Issue corrections for individual articles where you have relied on misleading information, unreliable sources, and used passive language to describe Israel’s actions.
- Appoint a public editor for Israel-Palestine to impartially review content and name/hold accountable editors who rushed through disingenuous reporting without rigorous fact checking.
We believe in the NYT’s capability for rigorous, evidence-based reporting. It is crucial, now more than ever, for the Times to reflect on its standards and ensure its coverage does not unwittingly support injustice or perpetuate conflict.
Sincerely,
[Your Name] [Collective Name]
fornyteditors.com 