Pulitzer Prize Distracts From Systemic New York Times Bias
The headquarters of The New York Times. Photo: Wikimedia Commons.
Pop, pop, pop. That’s not the sound of gunfire in Gaza, but the uncorking of champagne bottles in Times Square and the Jerusalem bureau of The New York Times, as the Gray Lady celebrates winning the 2024 Pulitzer Prize in International Reporting for “its wide-ranging and revelatory coverage of Hamas’ lethal attack in southern Israel on October 7, Israel’s intelligence failures and the Israeli military’s sweeping, deadly response in Gaza.”
But is The New York Times a deserving winner, and is this Pulitzer Prize a ringing endorsement of the paper’s coverage of the Israel-Hamas war during the past several months?
The Winning Articles
It’s no secret that The New York Times has been the subject of intense criticism from HonestReporting and other organizations for its coverage since October 7. There are clearly systemic problems in the newsroom when it comes to reporting on Israel. Nonetheless, it would be foolish to entirely dismiss the paper’s ability to produce high-quality journalism when dogma and personal agendas are left to the side. And given the enormous output of articles published since October 7, there were plenty of stories for editors to choose from when selecting what to send to the Pulitzer committee.
Most out of the seven selected articles did a professional job of investigating the events of October 7. Others, however, were problematic.
One, “Video Investigation: Visual Evidence Shows Israel Dropped 2,000-Pound Bombs Where It Ordered Gaza’s Civilians to Move for Safety,” claimed Israel’s air force used US-provided 2,000-pound bombs in Gaza, specifically a model that “is one of the most destructive munitions in Western military arsenals.”
According to the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, however, The New York Times based its analysis on the wrong bomb, a particular ordinance that explodes on impact with little penetration properties, while Ira Stoll expounded on the other biases in the piece.
Another story, “The War Turns Gaza Into a ‘Graveyard’ for Children,” was written by
Other stories in the package, while not problematic from a textual perspective, do include selected images provided by Mohammed Fayq Abu Mostafa for Reuters and Hatem Ali for Associated Press, both of whose photos were utilized by The New York Times after they knew they had infiltrated Israel on October 7, as exposed by HonestReporting. (More on that later.)
What Wasn’t Included
As interesting as what was included in The New York Times’ seven-article submission to the Pulitzer committee is what didn’t make the cut.
For example, the investigation into Hamas sexual violence and rape on October 7, “Screams Without Words,” did not feature in the Pulitzer package despite being the first mainstream media article to expose these atrocities to the wider world.
The article was subsequently attacked by anti-Israel media and activists who feared that it would promote a “pro-Israel” narrative, and give further justification for Israel’s military campaign to destroy Hamas.
New York Times staff also sought to delegitimize the article in leaked internal arguments, contributing to the rape denial spread by Hamas sympathizers.
Pulitzer Gives Legitimacy to Poor Journalism?
Seven stories don’t adequately sum up The New York Times’ overall reporting since October 7. The Pulitzer committee stated it had awarded the prize, in part, for coverage of the “Israeli military’s sweeping, deadly response in Gaza.”
As far as the general public is concerned, the paper is being rewarded, not for several submitted pieces, but for the breadth of its reporting.
And that reporting leaves a lot to be desired. A look through HonestReporting’s website and social media feeds over the past several months reveals no end of problems concerning New York Times coverage, including:
Israel Accused of Al-Ahli Hospital Strike
“Israeli Strike Kills Hundreds in Hospital, Palestinians Say,” blared The New York Times’ initial summary in the aftermath of what was shortly proven to be a Palestinian Islamic Jihad rocket strike on the al-Ahli hospital in Gaza.
The New York Times jumped at the opportunity to lay the blame at Israel’s door, including by parroting the claim in a subsequent headline that 500 people had died without even bothering to mention that Hamas controls the Palestinian Health Ministry.
#MeToo… unless you’re a Jew.
The media has been quick to accuse Israel of sin but “cannot independently verify” any of Hamas’ well-documented atrocities. That’s not journalism, it’s populism. It’s biased. And, it’s wrong. Your readers deserve better, @nytimes. pic.twitter.com/aA6LADJV12— HonestReporting (@HonestReporting) December 29, 2023
Showcasing Gazan Photojournalists Who Infiltrated Israel on Oct. 7
Last November, HonestReporting exposed the presence inside Israel on October 7 of Gazan photojournalists who had illegally crossed the border with Hamas. In addition to those already mentioned above, the work of freelance photojournalist Yousef Masoud from inside Gaza throughout the Israel-Hamas war was featured in The New York Times, which submitted his photos to the prestigious George Polk Awards — a Pulitzer precursor that he won last February.
After more information emerged, including Masoud citing Hitler on a social media post, HonestReporting publicly called on the Pulitzer Board not to reward such behavior.
Ultimately, Masoud was not honored with a Pulitzer.
Rehiring a Pro-Hitler, Pro-Terror Freelancer
We were appalled when The New York Times rehired a freelancer previously exposed by HonestReporting for his pro-Hitler, pro-terrorist social media posts.
OUTRAGE: @nytimes has rehired Gazan freelance filmmaker Soliman Hijjy (also spelled Sulaiman Hejji) who praised Adolf Hitler on social media and later posted he was “in a state of harmony as Hitler was during the Holocaust.” pic.twitter.com/V0UmjQrmyX
— HonestReporting (@HonestReporting) October 20, 2023
Following a significant public outcry as a result of HonestReporting’s campaigning, Soliman Hijjy quietly disappeared from New York Times bylines, despite the paper’s attempts to defend his employment.
No Gold Standard
The New York Times should be recognized when it does what it aspires to and produces fair, balanced and professional stories. It should also be called out when it all too often deviates from those aspirations and descends into the anti-Israel bias that characterizes so much of its reporting.
The awarding of a Pulitzer Prize has effectively given the seal of approval for all of the paper’s Israel-Hamas war coverage — including all of those times that the Gray Lady has not lived up to appropriate standards. Bad behavior has been swept under the carpet.
Where The New York Times goes, other media follow, along with politicians and influencers. Appointing the Gray Lady’s coverage as the gold standard makes accountability even harder in an already febrile atmosphere.
The author is the Editorial Director of HonestReporting, a Jerusalem-based media watchdog with a focus on antisemitism and anti-Israel bias — where a version of this article first appeared.
The post Pulitzer Prize Distracts From Systemic New York Times Bias first appeared on Algemeiner.com.