|
|
|
|
“Exposing & Combating Liberal Media Bias”
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Steven ErlangerLatest Whitewash of Terrorist Group Hamas by NYT's Steven ErlangerNew York Times Jerusalem bureau chief Steven Erlanger has long been known for his pro-Palestinian reporting, and his Sunday magazine profile of Gaza's Khaled Abu Hilal, who went from the "mainstream" Palestinian group Fatah to the overtly anti-Israeli terrorist group Hamas, certainly fit the pattern. Erlanger began with this cloying, sorrowful harangue:
Times Watch Presents the Quotes of Note for 2006 from The NY TimesIt's unanimous! Times Watch guest judges Stephen Spruiell, who runs National Review Online's Media Blog, and Times critic William McGowan, author of the upcoming book Gray Lady Down, both picked as his worst quote of the year one from New York Times Publisher Arthur Sulzberger Jr. (The quote also earned Quote of the Year honors from Times Watch's parent organization, the Media Research Center.) Spruiell says it was the "sheer arrogance" of Sulzberger's speech that put the paper's publisher over the top. NY Times Frets Over 'Asymmetry' in Death Toll for Israel vs. Terrorist HezbollahHas Israel already gone too far, waged too successful of a counterattack against an incursion and double kidnapping by the terrorist group Hezbollah? As the assault on the Syria-and-Iran backed terrorist group goes on over Lebanon, the Times takes a breath and begins to revert to its usual biases. Jerusalem bureau chief Steven Erlanger frets about "asymmetrical" death rates in his lead story, "With Israeli Use of Force, Debate Over Proportion."
The NY Times and Israel: Still Reporting on a SlantThe Shiite anti-Israeli terror group Hezbollah crossed from Lebanon into Israel on July 12, killing eight Israeli soldiers and kidnapping two others. Israel is responding with force, unleashing targeted air strikes against Hezbollah positions in Lebanon in an effort to get the kidnapped soldiers back. The New York Times' coverage of Israel's counterattack has been generally fair, or at least more balanced than usual -- the prospect of wide-scale war appears to have clarified somewhat the paper's often-wishful thinking about the true aims of Israel’s foes. One major annoying tic that remains is the paper's use of the term "captured" to describe kidnapped Israeli soldiers, when it comes to covering the June kidnapping by Hamas of Gilad Shalit at an Israeli Defense Forces outpost, and the two kidnapped soldiers resulting from the incursion by Hezbollah. "Captured" is a phrase used by anti-Israeli leftists like ANSWER and implies these soldiers were prisoners of war captured on the field of battle, not abducted over a border by a terrorist group. |
|
|
[ Home | Blogs |
Forum |
About |
Contact
]
| |
Recent Comments
3 min 56 sec ago
8 min 50 sec ago
10 min 22 sec ago
10 min 32 sec ago
11 min 42 sec ago
13 min 9 sec ago
18 min 18 sec ago
18 min 36 sec ago
20 min 10 sec ago
23 min 20 sec ago