I have had it with the so-called “even handed” reportage that buries the truth in a barrage of lies. What, pray tell, am I talking about? While the online edition of the New York Times has actually covered Phillipe Karsenty’s legal victory, you’d never know it is a victory from reading the piece.
The reporter, Mike Nizza, opens with this: “A fierce debate over an iconic Palestinian image was jolted anew today by a French court appeal court ruling…”Say what? We are not talking about an “iconic image” but about a manufactured news report that damned Israel in the eyes of the world.
Nizza also says that the “iconic image’s authenticity was always in question.” Say what again?
This is another Big Lie. The September, 2000 news image/film/voice-over narration had no doubt that the Israelis had cold-bloodedly killed the boy. C’mon: The Israelis even apologized and it took them a very long time before they were even willing to begin to consider that a) the Israelis could not have shot the boy–not even if they had wanted to do so; and that b) the entire incident was staged, a carefully planned hoax.
The piece quotes Karsenty and his “supporters” in the media who claim a victory–but it also quotes France 2′s lawyers and Charles Enderlin himself who claim that the decision merely allows Karsenty to hold his “strident” point of view without considering it “libelous.” According to them, the court decision has nothing to do with the actual facts of the case, which includes footage which shows that the child is still alive on camera even after he has been pronounced dead.
You see: Both sides make good points, both sides are equally worthy, moral. According to Nizza, the “court has not released its decision, increasing the likelihood that this round in a continuing debate is far from over.”
According to the Times, nothing has been proven. To them, this all-too-academic debate continues.
I’ve had it, I’m going to bed. I hope that someone else–Karsenty himself, perhaps Professor Landes, or HonestReporting, performs a “fisk”analysis of the media coverage. For my part–To sleep, perchance to dream.
Read Mike Nizza’s article Here.
Why would anyone want to regularly read the New York Times? It is no longer a “must read” publication. There are better things that one can do with their time.
“…you’d never know it is a victory from reading the piece.”
I agree with your criticisms of the body of the story, but readers of the piece might glance at the headline, which is “Critic of Palestinian Video Wins French Case”
The Times seems to be good for nothing anymore other than the obits and the arts/entertainment section (and even then…). As for their “news,” I wouldn’t even believe their weather reporting.
“Why would anyone want to regularly read the New York Times?”
Masochism would be one reason.
Also, if you are delusional, and wish to have your delusions reinforced, reading the Times is indispensable.
If you are completely sane? Dunno.
The NYT is an NGO which is, like many others, determined to shape some sort of new world order by all means available to it. Principal among these means is the bulldozing of public opinion to achieve its desired election outcomes.
To those innocents who still presume it to be in the business of informing the public of the important daily ‘news’, it returns their trust by deliberately corrupting their understanding of daily events.
False news is the worst enemy of a democracy.
My local fish-wrapper, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution (AJC), is of the same bent as the New York Times.
Of late, the AJC’s pages have shrunk in size and the number of pages in the paper have cratered as readership has declined. Eight percent in the last year, if memory serves. People in Atlanta are simply not buying the paper, nor the “news” it serves up.
It amazes me that these papers refuse to offer actual news instead continuing to serve as propaganda organs for the left, even as oblivion approaches.
Au contraire, mon ami. The Times is excellent for lining our paths and covering up with mulch! And theatre might still be good. But one of these days, the times will be no more, and they won’t even know why.
It’s worthwhile reading the Times simply to keep tabs on the deluded.
A huge media scandal is terribly inconvenient when you’re in the middle of a major campaign for shield laws, isn’t it?
The “iconic image” of the protocols of the elders of zion were also “jolted anew” – or at least jolted me anew – when i saw them on a table in the center of the quad of a well known college campus yesterday. Iconic images are jolting all over the place apparently.
Even before we knew the al-Dura scene was a hoax, something my dad said stuck with me: Why was the man pressed into the crevice with the boy on the outside, and not the other way around?
I do not read New York Times. This organization is huge pornography of disinformation and special interest commentary disguise as news. My opinion is no different to a communist and Nazi propaganda.
Good thing that this organization are loosing readership. Internet is the best source of news. Look on news from abroad, they actually report news the way it happen. I hope NYT will fold soon.
People still read the New York Times?
Who knew?
The NYT is in a well-deserved financial death spiral. Unless “God” Soros buys it as his personal op-ed rag.
Why the Gripes. The NY Times always prints all the news that fits.
Bear in mind. The NY Times prints all the new that fits.