In the News...

Publishing a piece on an Op-Ed page is not a license to bypass verification of fact. The New York Times has failed that fundamental test. 

In publishing Nicholas Kristof’s recent piece alleging "systemic" atrocities—including a grotesque and forensically implausible claim of "canine-assisted" sexual assault—the Times has sacrificed the tenets of journalism in a manner that predictably fuels antisemitic narratives.

The Times didn’t just fail once in the editorial malpractice department; it went out swinging:

• The      Sourcing Failure: The primary source for these incendiary claims is      the Euro-Med Human Rights Monitor, an organization whose leadership has      documented, photographic ties to Hamas. This was not disclosed to readers.
• The      Evidentiary Double Standard: For the victims of October 7, the Times     demanded 10,000+ pieces of visual evidence and months of forensic review.      For Kristof, they accepted 14 verbal testimonies with zero visual or      physical corroboration.
• The      Misrepresentation of Authority: Former PM Ehud Olmert – who hasn’t      hesitated to criticize Israel in other matters – has already had to      clarify that his words were taken out of context to provide a veneer of      "Israeli validation" for claims he did not actually endorse.

We are seeing the consequences of this "shoddy reportage" in real-time. We are already hearing of Jews being harassed with these "dog rape" libels; it’s a rhetorical echo of 1930s dehumanization, right in our streets.

Some defend the author by pointing to his two Pulitzers.  Artistic or professional pedigree is no shield for the promotion of dangerous falsehoods. The Times new this could not survive the evidentiary standards ordinarily required for front-page investigative reporting, so it was instead elevated through the Opinion section under the protective framing of commentary while retaining the emotional force of reported fact.

To the editors who "ok'd" this: You have not only failed your profession; you have placed a target on the backs of your own Jewish employees and the broader community. You have traded your credibility as a "Paper of Record" for the hollow satisfaction of a pre-determined narrative.

It’s time for an immediate retraction and an independent audit of the standards—or lack thereof—that allowed this blood libel to go to print.