Fairness & Accuracy In Reporting (FAIR): UN Tells Israel: Cease Fire; NYT Says: If You Want
The editorial boards of the nation’s major media organizations must have been frantic last week.
Used to reporting on US foreign policy, wars and arms exports so as to portray the United States as a benevolent, law-abiding and democracy-defending nation, they were confronted on March 25 with a real challenge dealing with Israel and Gaza. No sooner did the Biden administration, for the first time, abstain and thus allow passage of a United Nations Security Council resolution that was not just critical of Israel, but demanded a ceasefire in Gaza, than US officials began declaring that the resolution that they allowed to pass was really meaningless.
It was “nonbinding,” they said.
That was enough for the New York Times (3/25/24), which produced the most one-sided report on the decision. That article focused initially on how Resolution 2728 (which followed three resolutions that the US had vetoed, and a fourth that was so watered down that China and Russia vetoed it instead) had led to a diplomatic dust-up with the Israeli government: Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu canceled a planned visit to Washington by a high-level Israeli delegation to discuss Israel’s planned invasion of Rafah and the future of Gaza and the West Bank.
It should be noted that the New York Times, when there is a dispute regarding a document, typically runs a copy of the document in question—or, if it is too long, the relevant portion of it. In the case of Resolution 2728, which even counting its headline only runs 263 words, that would have not been a hard call. Despite the disagreement between the US and most of the Council over the wording of the ceasefire resolution, the Times chose not to run or even excerpt it.
Fucking Hasbara Times. And this is just weeks after their Al-Aqsa Flood atrocity porn fabrication was exposed by The Intercept: “Between the Hammer and the Anvil” The Story Behind the New York Times October 7 Exposé
Not to imply that the Times was the only one: the FAIR article goes on about other US media misrepresentations, and compares them to European media coverage of the UNSC resolution.
Just more evidence the NYT just parrots state department talking points for our conflicts. If people are still taking them at face value after the Iraq war theyre hopeless.
Yup, after the Iraq war I figured out that it was no anomaly, but rather a crystal-clear example of how the system actually works.
