There really needs to be an investigation into whether the New York Times allowed an article full of false propaganda to be published.
The issue needs to be investigated further, and hopefully the NYT faces some consequences for this if it turns out this is an article full of lies. I expect this kind of disinformation and propaganda on tiktok, but not from the New York Times.
You forgot to mention that “HonestReporting” is an Israeli media advocacy group, or that all of their headlines tout the idea that Israel is being badly maligned. It is not a news organization and, to my knowledge, does not follow journalistic ethics to any degree.
And now you know the rest of the story.
So is there any criticism of the veracity of the article from any trustworthy sources? A quick Google did not turn up any. Though given the standard of Google as a search engine I would not find it too surprising that it didn’t (not that Google is biased one way or the other in this conflicts but in a case like this where there is widely distributed popular article, trying to find something that is not a copy of the article, but a less popular or widely distributed criticism of the article it is next to useless)
I don’t know yet. The article was just posted on October 9th. There needs to be more investigation to see if the article is dishonest.
Right now it just seems like individual forensic experts, physicians, etc are saying the photos do not match real world examples of shooting.
I don’t think The New York Times used quotes from random folk on “X” for some of their expert opinions.
BTW, should there be recriminations against “HonestReporting” if it turns out that they are in the wrong? I don’t I see that in the OP.
Maybe your title should start out “One very biased advocacy group claims…”?
Really? First, investigated by who exactly?
Also, what article? It’s clearly states it’s an opinion piece!
Did he actually think we wouldn’t follow those links he provided?
I found the big blue word “Opinion” in the first link to be enough.
In that same post he called it an “article” twice, and blamed the NYT for having " this kind of disinformation and propaganda".
Why am I certain the OP would not have the same ire if the NYT published opinion pieces that repeated the ‘decapitated babies’ lies?
This thread is sort of like a glitter bomb going off in their face as someone is trying to build it.
Is there such a thing as a non-biased advocacy group?
One that’s in the right*, and trying to be unbiased? Humans aren’t really capable of being unbiased, so “as unbiased as can be reasonably expected” is the best we can hope for if we don’t want to retire the word.
I don’t have any reasonable expectation from any advocacy group to be unbiased - that would be like accusing a lawyer (or “advocate”) of being biased in favor of their client. The whole purpose of an advocacy group is to be biased in favor of the cause they support, and they’re nothing wrong with that, unless you’re claiming that “bias” is just another word for “dishonesty.”
Bias is either dishonesty or error, yes.
I don’t agree - I think it just means lack of objectivity. It’s dishonest when held by somebody who is supposed to be objective (like mainstream media or the justice system), and lying is always bad, obviously, but there’s nothing wrong with bias in and of itself.
Of course, in my case, the things I believe in are objectively true, while those who disagree with me are biased. That goes without saying.
I used to think my local paper ran some skewed articles`but they’re not the NYT that covers the world. Those editors have to be on point for sure.
Carried out by whom?
Why Faux News of course. They’d be perfect for such investigations. /s