While Gary Rosenblatt’s articles in general are balanced, “With Times Under Siege, Jewish Reporters Hit Back” (May 24) seems to ignore the many instances and factual studies of The New York Times’ bias against Israel.
Perhaps these usually highly esteemed and usually excellent reporters are defending against their unconscious embarrassment at being Jews who are part of one of the most influential and widely read newspapers in the world that consistently distorts the truth and facts about the only Jewish state.
What about Jerold Auerbach’s “Print To Fit: The NYT, Zionism and Israel,” indicting the NYT for its penchant for, to say the least, its “discomfort” with the Jewish state?
CAMERA’s 2011 six-month study (their second in 10 years), available on their website, documents the NYT’s anti-Israel bias. Just because there are anti-Israel groups that have a counter opinion does not mean they are correct. The study said: “The dominant finding … is a disproportionate, continuous, embedded indictment of Israel that dominates both news and commentary sections. Israeli views are downplayed while Palestinian perspectives, especially criticism of Israel, are amplified and even promoted. The net effect is an overarching message, woven into the fabric of the coverage, of Israeli fault and responsibility for the conflict.”
Islamic doctrine of Sacred Land promoted by Muhammed says that no Muslim is ever to give up any land where there once was Muslim sovereignty, under the penalty of death. Read Arafat’s speeches and see the PA law on their books saying so. That is why there is no peace. It has nothing to do with which Israeli government is in place or what policies they pursue by their presence in the West Bank to defend themselves.
Please do not add to the defamation of the only Jewish state. Please make sure any legitimate critiques are actually fair and accurate.
Upset Over Times Column
I expected a more critical evaluation of the degree of anti-Semitism portrayed by The New York Times in “With Times Under Siege, Jewish Reporters Hit Back,” May 24.
Quoting Jewish reporters’ opinions doesn’t mean that The Times is not critical of Israel. The article appeared juvenile and typical of an article that the New York Times would write. Interviewing three Jewish reporters is the evidence? Joseph Berger said that “what may get lost is that the situation is due to the foolishness of their own leaders” when speaking about the suffering of Palestinians. Why is that not the headline?
Also, citing Netanyahu and his government as a cause of Israel being viewed more critically is just like saying, as The Times does, that everything Trump does is wrong, including moving the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem, the true capital. The Times’ anti-Semitic and anti-Israel reporting came way before Trump and Netanyahu.
I expect a little more from the editor of The Jewish Week in writing such an article and I am considering ending my subscription to The Jewish Week, as I have done with The Times.
Lynn Chinitz Gruenstein