• by Ray Schultz , Columnist, October 23, 2023

There has been much comment on the gullibility of news organizations in reporting that Israel was to blame for the bombing of a Gaza hospital two weeks ago. 

On Monday, one of the top newsrooms in the country admitted that it misplayed the story.  

The New York Times said in an editor’s note that it published “news of an explosion at a hospital in Gaza City, leading its coverage with claims by Hamas government officials that an Israeli airstrike was the cause and that hundreds of people were dead or injured. The report included a large headline at the top of The Times’ website.” 

Even Israel supporters were horrified by this seeming news, which was independently published by newsrooms throughout the country and the world. 

As Max Boot wrote in The Washington Post, “The Hamas-controlled Palestinian Health Ministry in Gaza immediately blamed the blast on an Israeli airstrike and claimed that 500 civilians had been killed. This ‘breaking news’ was immediately, and credulously, picked up by Western news media. (BBC alert: “Hundreds of people have been killed in an Israeli strike on a hospital in Gaza, according to Palestinian officials.”) 

The consequences: “Even U.S. allies such as Turkey and Saudi Arabia stridently denounced the purported Israeli airstrike,” Boot continued. “The leaders of the Palestinian Authority, Egypt and Jordan canceled a planned meeting with President Biden. Angry protesters marched everywhere from Beirut to Baghdad.”

What happened next? “Israel subsequently denied being at fault and blamed an errant rocket launch by the Palestinian faction group Islamic Jihad, which has in turn denied responsibility,” the Times writes. “American and other international officials have said their evidence indicates that the rocket came from Palestinian fighter positions.

Here's where the Times feels it went wrong: “The Times’s initial accounts attributed the claim of Israeli responsibility to Palestinian officials, and noted that the Israeli military said it was investigating the blast. However, the early versions of the coverage — and the prominence it received in a headline, news alert and social media channels — relied too heavily on claims by Hamas, and did not make clear that those claims could not immediately be verified. The report left readers with an incorrect impression about what was known and how credible the account was.”

Granted, not all journalistic errors or misinterpretations have this kind of weight. But this stands as an object lesson as reporters struggle to cover fast-breaking events.  

The Times acknowledges, “Given the sensitive nature of the news during a widening conflict, and the prominent promotion it received, Times editors should have taken more care with the initial presentation, and been more explicit about what information could be verified.”

It concludes, “Newsroom leaders continue to examine procedures around the biggest breaking news events — including for the use of the largest headlines in the digital report — to determine what additional safeguards may be warranted.”