Journal for the Study of Antisemitism

158 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 1:139
ment was given a report of the brutal bludgeoning murders of two fourteenyear-old
Israeli boys (one an Israeli-American). Even those accounts were
“balanced” with the number of Palestinian Arabs killed by IDF gunfire–suggesting
an equivalency between the deliberate targeting of civilians
and soldiers shooting in response to being shot at. 71
The Times’ placement of editorial matter likewise betrays bias. In July
of 2001, the paper published a lengthy front-page opinion article by its
Israel bureau chief, Deborah Sontag, suggesting that all the parties to the
Camp David peace talks, not just Yasser Arafat, were to blame for their
failure. Although Ms. Sontag acknowledged that her article was based
solely on conversations with “peace advocates, academics, and diplomats”–and
not with the principals or with any participants from the Israeli
side–its prominent position on page one contributed to its impression of
gravitas and authenticity. Her views were immediately countered by
Israel’s former prime minister Ehud Barak, as well as by the Times’ own
William Safire–but their comments appeared on the opinion pages at the
back of the first section. 72
The Times also gives op-ed space to leaders of Hamas, which is designated
as a Foreign Terrorist Organization by the United States State Department,
the United Kingdom, the European Union, Israel, and other
countries. 73 In so doing the Times relies on the argument that Hamas is the
“legitimate and democratically elected Palestinian government,”and that its
“political wing” should be distinguished from its “military wing.” 74
Would the Times grant the same editorial indulgence to al-Qaeda or
Osama bin Laden? In fact, no such distinction is made by Hamas itself–a
group whose charter calls for Israel’s destruction and is filled with unadulterated
antisemitism, and which has been responsible for the murder of U.S.
citizens in Israel. In the case of Gilad Shalit, an Israeli soldier it captured in
2006, Hamas also claims that it is not bound by the Geneva Conventions
because it is not a state (and thus has no obligation to allow Red Cross visits
to Shalit). Although the Times has made numerous references to alleged
violations of international law by Israel, it has made no editorial mention of
71. Ricki Hollander, “Human Interest Stories in New York Times Skewed
toward Palestinians,” C.A.M.E.R.A., May 11, 2006. See also Honest Reporting,
“The New York Times: A Year-Long Analysis,” available at http://www.honestreporting.com/articles/45884734/critiques/new/The_New_York_Times_A_Year-
Long_Analysis.asp
72. Andrea Levin, Lobbyists With a Cause, C.A.M.E.R.A., August 20, 2001.
73. The Washington Post and Los Angeles Times have provided similar forums.
74. See Matthew Levitt, Hamas: Politics, Charity, and Terrorism in the Service
of Jihad (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2006), noting that Hamas is a unitary
group, its “wings” part of the same whole).