Fake News: New York Times Admits It Screwed Up On Coverage of the Gaza Hospital Blast, Blaming Israel Because Hamas Said So

On October 23, 2023, the New York Times in a rare admission, said that it misinformed on it's early coverage of the blast at the Al-Ahli Baptist Hospital in Gaza. When Islamic Jihad, not Israel bombed a hospital parking lot in Gaza, falsely saying 500 people had died (it was about ten), the NY Times Quickly Blamed Israel.

"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."

The NY Times has often accused those in the independent conservative media, of bias towards Israel. Conservative media has accused mainstrream media of anti Israel bias. Note from the NY Times is below

Editors' Note: Gaza Hospital Coverage Oct. 23, 2023Updated 7:02 a.m. ET

On Oct. 17, The New York Times 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's website.

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. American and other international officials have said their evidence indicates that the rocket came from Palestinian fighter positions.

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.

The Times continued to update its coverage as more information became available, reporting the disputed claims of responsibility and noting that the death toll might be lower than initially reported. Within two hours, the headline and other text at the top of the website reflected the scope of the explosion and the dispute over responsibility.

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. 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.