Sunday, June 24th | 11 Tammuz 5778


Be in the know!

Get our exclusive daily news briefing.

March 18, 2015 4:34 pm

After Harsh Editorial, Watchdog Group Says New York Times Has Anti-Netanyahu Obsession

avatar by Algemeiner Staff

Email a copy of "After Harsh Editorial, Watchdog Group Says New York Times Has Anti-Netanyahu Obsession" to a friend
Office of The New York Times, in New York City. Photo: WikiCommons.

Office of The New York Times. Photo: Wiki Commons.

The Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America (CAMERA) told The Algemeiner today that The New York Times has an anti-Netanyahu obsession. The media watchdog made the comments in response to a strongly worded editorial in The Times decrying Prime Minister Netanyahu’s election victory on Tuesday.

“Anyone who wasn’t already aware of The New York Times mindset just has to read today’s paper on Israel’s elections to realize how pervasive is the anti-Netanyahu obsession at that newspaper,” said Senior Media Analyst Ricki Hollander  of CAMERA.

CAMERA also accused the paper of being anti-Israel. Hollander said that the newspaper “makes no secret of its disdain for the Israeli election results– and  of Israel’s democracy.”

Hollander added that she is “hard pressed to think of any other foreign election that has elicited such clear and obvious bias at The New York Times.”

Entitled “An Israeli Election Turns Ugly,” The New York Times editorial board used words, such as desperate, craven, racist, outrageous, and fear-mongering in its description of Netanyahu’s reelection campaign. The board also argued that Netanyahu had “forfeited any claim to representing all Israelis.”

The New York Times specifically criticized Netanyahu’s comments this week in opposition to a Palestinian state, writing:

Mr. Netanyahu showed that he was desperate, and craven, enough to pull out all the stops. On Monday, he promised that if his Likud faction remained in power, he would never allow the creation of a Palestinian state, thus repudiating a position he had taken in 2009.

The publication continued:

But his statement this week laid bare his duplicity, confirmed Palestinian suspicions and will make it even harder for him to repair his poisoned relations with President Obama, who has invested heavily in pushing a two-state solution.

The New York Times editorial board also accused Netanyahu of ugliness:

Mr. Netanyahu added to the ugliness of the campaign when, during Tuesday’s voting, he said in a video on social media: ‘Right-wing rule is in danger. Arab voters are streaming in huge quantities to the polling stations.’

The editorial further described what it considered fear-mongering:

In his desperation, Mr. Netanyahu resorted to fear-mongering and anti-Arab attacks while failing to address the issues that Israelis said they were most worried about, namely the high cost of housing and everyday living in Israel.

Soon after the editorial was published, Haaretz journalist Chemi Shalev described it as one of the harshest in memory. “New York Times greets Netanyahu victory with one of harshest editorials ever,” he wrote on Twitter.

Share this Story: Share On Facebook Share On Twitter Email This Article

Let your voice be heard!

Join the Algemeiner
  • P.Lake

    After the NYT published a front page article on illegal settlements on stolen land in the west bank without
    1. mentioning that the settlements are illegal under international law and ON stolen land or
    2. interviewing a single indigenous Palestinian or even a Jewish Israeli journalist such as Amira Hass or Gideon Levy who have actually lived outside of these settlements in the West Bank and/or Gaza (Ms.Hass’ case) and report truthfully on the brutal occupation.
    Yes. NYT must be antisemitic. LOL.
    The only antisemites in this blog are those who conflate opposition to theft, murder, torture of children, and war crimes as “antisemitic”.
    Have a nice day.

  • Ken Greenberg

    Ya think maybe the NYT is having a childish hissy-fit ’cause the Israelis chose Netanyahu ?

  • I eagerly look forward to the day when Jews

  • To The New York Times !
    Nothing Helped the Left-But can you smell the napalm this morning?

    It did not help you.

    – Your dirty underhanded funneling of financing from overseas for the Israel Left did not help you.
    – The naked monolithic jihad by nearly the entire Israeli media and the entire overseas media against Netanyahu did not help.
    – The corrupt prosecutorial abuses and last minute “investigations” of the bottle recycling change in the Prime Minister’s residence and the gardening allowances and air travel of the Prime Minister did not help you.
    – The polls before the election that were predicting 21 seats for the Likud and 26 for Labor did not help you.
    – The demonstration of the Left the week before elections and the gross inflation of its size by the biased media did not help you.
    – The assault against Bibi by the White House and the State Department and the Democrats and the Eurotrash did not help you.
    – The naked endorsements of the Labor Party by the American administration and the Europeans did not help you.
    – The bitching about the Congressional speech did not help you.
    – The open endorsement of the Labor Party by the Arabs did not help you.

    Like the smell of napalm, I love the whimpering of leftists in the morning! It smells/sounds like victory.

  • E Pluribus Wombat

    The New York Times wants to see the nuclear destruction of Israel followed by a global holocaust upon all the Jews. Period. Full stop.

  • Max Cohen

    The N.Y.Times reverted to being “The Grey Lady,” as was her nickname of old. She reacted as if the election result was an insolent goosing of her secular seculorum. Tek, tsk.

  • Rhialto Marrvellouss

    Netanyahu deserved all he got from the times and more. There is nothing approaching untrue or exaggerated in the excerpts here. Netanyahu has earned every syllable of billingsgate which he receives. The only bad thing about the opprobrium directed at Netanyahu is that he will use it to reinforce his paranoid position of Israel against the world. What I find interesting here is that bb is engaged in cutting off the branch behind himself[to make that more explicit, he is cutting the branch between himself and the trunk]. The U.S.A. has been Israel’s only dependable ally for a long time. bb is actively insulting, challenging, and denigrating the president of the U.S.A., who is responsible for the conduct of U.S. foreign affairs. I believe he may soon find out that being a Jew and from Israel is not necessarily enough to allow this type of behavior, without consequence. But, WHILE YOU’VE GOT IT, FLAUNT IT.

    • Arnold Persky

      The occupant of the White House denigrates himself with his obvious anti-Israel positions and his attempts to destroy the only US ally in that forsaken part of the world.

  • Pierre Elie Mamou

    breathtakingly hypocritical, the NYTimes, doesn’t quote Netanyahu complete sentence about palestinian state: in this circunstance and situation, a palestinan state would be a nucleus for djihadists. Just looking what happens in Europe (NYTimes doesn’t cae about Iran threatehning USA, NYT’s memory is short), not to speak of the rest of the world, the djihadist danger is real

  • VictorMc

    Zzzzzz (yawn) The NYT is unutterably boring. Who on earth pays for it?

  • Bullfrog Europe

    Israel is an amazing country not without its own problems. Sitting on the edge of the Arab world, it is in a very precarious position.

    The United States is a fantastic country, a loyal supporter of Israel, but it’s foreign policy, over many years has created many world problems.

    The New York Times is a disgrace. A newspaper reflecting anti Israel sentiment.

    Here is the article from after the 2014 Gaza crisis.

  • shalom

    what are you so disturbed about.

    the times simply detailed what many israelis think about

    netanyahu. jews who are zionist and are concerned about the future of the jewish people and the future of a

    jewish democratic state fear that netanyahu cant be trusted

    to represent all the people and the needs of the state and its future.

    he says he loves eretz yisraael but he is the pm of the

    State of Israel and must be faithful to its needs not to

    his ideology

  • mackykam

    These types of editorials are the product of Jews that have left their religion behind, much as has left- wing Israeli media types. The further away they go the more they grovel in attempts to ingratiate themselves with Goyim, hoping all will forget their genetic roots. Jews’ greatest enemies have always been the beget of those who’ve left the fold. Torquemada is a prime example. These renegade Jews willingly spit on God’s gift of an eternal homeland for the Jewish people. Awaiting God’s spitting on them. Soon, and in our lifetime.

  • bob zucker

    The New York Times was complicit in the cover up of the Holocaust, as well. They helped to conceal the actions of the United States Department of State to keep Europe’s Jews bottled up with the genocidal Nazis and their European helpers.
    RZ haLewi

  • Isaac Brajtman

    I was quite saddened to read the NYTimes editorial. Not because it criticised BiBi for electioneering (to which every politician is entitled), but by the childish and bigoted writing of an editorial in a “leading” news paper. It certainly wasn’t directed at the intelligent reader, but rather at the masses who are uneducated in the real issues of the Israeli /Arab conflict. Surely the editorial board understands the real issues. Or are they a bunch of bigots expressing they own agenda. Well, I suppose thats called freedom of speech. As a matter of interest, who chooses their editorial board, and where does the money for the NYTimes come from?

  • Dana

    The Times could have written about Obama’s last campaign that it was “desperate, craven, racist, outrageous and fear0mongering” as well. But they had their heads too far up his posterior to see it.

  • Stella schindler

    Why are you surprised. The nyt is a textbook case of media bias. They make the case for dishonest reporting.
    And Jodi Rudoren among the worst ever.

    • paul durham


      in the words of a great new Yorker “You cannot be serious!” (Thanks to john EcEnroe)

      Jodi Rudoren biassed against Israel??

      She has consintenty been pro Israeli to the extent of misrepresentation. Get real.


  • steven L

    NYT leads the pack of antisemitic mass media.
    The whole Western world knows that the Muslims are not willing to recognize yet the state of IL and part of it is due to the support of the West to the Muslim world.

  • Dorothy Seidel Wigod

    Hard to say who was the worst – the NYT Editorial Board, Roger Cohen, or Tom Friedman.
    Maybe, one could say Cohen and the NYT were worse than Friedman.
    Between the attacks , the dire predictions and the hand-wringing, one would think that there was nothing worse happening on this planet than the outcome of the Israeli election.
    Anything about.. North Korea?
    What a day to open the opinion section of the newspaper of broken records.

  • Michael Garfinkel

    New York congressman Peter King understated the case when he referred to the Times as a “left-wing rag.”

    The fact that the Times hates Netanyahu, dislikes Israel, and lauds the Arabs should come as no surprise to anyone.

  • David Levy

    The NY Times has been infected by a sickness, called hatred, that stops them from any realistic or fair analysis. They can only spout hatred, no facts, no balance, just this pustulent sickness.

  • citizenstat

    The ‘Grey Lady’ has besmirched herself beyond repair with its vitriolic mudslinging against Israel. A better sobriquet for this paper is ‘Drab Harridan.’

  • noellsq

    Wish people would avoid this rag and hopefully adds would stop a BDS of the NEW YORK TIMES

  • Morrie Amitay

    How dare you insinuate that the Times is rabidly anti-Israel just because they are choking on their ownanti-Netanyahu bile ?

  • RobiMac

    Some people just hate it when a good guy wins.

  • Golum

    The Times once known as a Jewish Newspaper in a Jewish Town has now been for many years very anti-Israel and with it border line anti-Semitic!!! In plain talk they seem to have a constant “Hard-*n” for Israel and love of the araaaabs!!!!

  • In an embarrassing display of hysteria, The New York Times editorial staff can’t believe that Israeli voters did not listen to them.

  • I cancelled my subscription to the NY Times long ago. This newspaper has turned more sour than curdled milk. I am ashamed for them. Do they truly think that they represent the feelings of most New Yorkers? I can’t imagine that this would be the case. And I chalk all their insulting language about Benjamin Netanyahu up to racism. They’ve bought into our President’s delusional sense of superiority at being half black. They’re so “pro-Black” they’ve lost their compass. If he hates, they must hate? How stupid is that?


    the scarry part is that the editor is jewish

  • Ueberdoofus

    The NYT’s obsession with everything O’bama precludes objective reporting and analysis. When those guys are old men and women, however, they will not look back and see their error. They will never relent pursuit of their socialist nirvana.

  • Jews and Friends of Israel everywhere, the only way to defeat the HATE of this self serving RAG, is to buy one…then email every Merchant,Retail Store,Automobile Manufacturer all who advertise.
    Every single one email that you will no longer be buying their product, service etc !
    This Voloume of Vitriol can only exist on advertising revenue !
    Within 20 years this repugnant ink pot will no longer exist, they are facing a certain death from the internet, let’s all band together as one and hasten the inevitable !

  • Francis Figliola
  • J. Brooks

    I totally agree with this article about the NYT. What disturbed me more were the over 500 comments to the article. There were many who claimed to be Jewish and most of the ones I read
    (I did not read all 500) were highly critical of Netanyahu. The NYT presented him as a racist, fear-mongering individual. They blamed all the problems between the USA and Israel firmly on his shoulders. What they fail to say is that it was a Democratic election and the Israeli people
    made their choice. I dismissed the NYT as an Anti-Israel piece of trash several years ago.
    But this article was so harsh. I thought to myself that they are just mad because they didn’t get the Prime Minister of THEIR choice so they want to get ugly. Never mind that it was a Democratic election in the only Democratic country in the entire Middle East and he was elected by his people. What a pathetic piece of journalism!! It is not up to the NYT or obama to choose the Israeli Prime Minister!

    • Kol yisroel araveem zeh la zeh !
      So maybe I am a little too old to translate Hebrew to phonetic, but Jews everywhere will !
      Mr. Brooks quietly summed up in few words, that many of the 500 posts that screamed fell short. No cogent context as to impact that Hasem Bibi will be in office after Obama is forgotten ! So who knows maybe in the basement of the NY Times, they have minions or Gollums writing posts on Jewish sites.
      Thank you for your comment,
      Shalom Haktivah !

  • This is not the first time the New York Times prints things definitely not fit to print. The editors, rather than embarrassing themselves and their news paper might learn something by reading Netanyahu’s outstanding book “A Durable Peace” where he lays out clearly and unequivocally that Judea and Samaria are integral parts of Israel. Because it is the heartland of the Jewish State that was promised to the Jews by Lord Balfour (1917) and awarded to the Jewish people at the Treaty of San Remo (1920), as part of the disposition of the defeated Ottoman Empire’s territories. Those who know the history of the region, know that the entire area of the “British Mandate for Palestine”(minus Jordan) is the sovereign property of the Jewish people. Jordan is the Palestinian state and every Palestinian used to have the right of citizenship in Jordan, until Arafat brought the PLO, his gang of hoodlums to Jordan, promptly undermining the peace of that country and leaving the King no choice but to rescind their citizenship and to expel them. They are and always were bent on the destruction of Israel, yet the Americans stick to their obsession of a “two-state solution” which is no solution at all, foremost because neither the Jews nor the Palestinians want it. The Palestinians have always said, and continue to declare that they will “push the Jews into the Sea.” Any people that announces as its goal what has been universally defined as genocide ought to be expelled from the so-called “community of nations.” Every Constitution, every Charter of every Organization that claims worldwide recognition, like the UN, proclaim the self-evident right of people to live, peacefully in their own country. I hope that there will never be a government of Israel so blind as to take advice from the USA. Had Levy Eshkol listened to President Johnson’s entreaties not to fire the first shot in 1967 and had he not given the command to destroy the Egyptian air force in a pre-emptive strike, thousands more Jews would have died for their independence. It would be sheer insanity to listen to the Americans who do not have a clue of the realities of the Middle East but still, irresponsible and arrogant, try to influence decisions for which, if mistaken – and they usually are – the Israeli people would have to pay the price. NUTS.

  • judithg

    I would not wipe a dirty toilet with a copy of the new york times as it would only serve to make it dirtier.
    a filthy bunch over there with their twisted mouths spewing their ferocious hatred of the strong, democratic, shining Jewish state of Israel.
    indeed, their frenzy could lead to strokes. heart attacks. gout. and, of course, gas. in which case they will no longer be capable of standing each other’s stink.

  • Knut Gorm Jorgensen

    I read the NYT and was totally surprised by the comments! I thought Obama had written it all!


  • Ellen

    The NYTimes is a bunch of Anti-Semitic, anti-Israel hypocrites. They are all upset that Netanyahu mentioned Arabs going in large numbers to vote. Yet, a simple search of their website shows article after article of the New York Times speaking about Black or Hispanic Voters. Here are a few quotes

    Oct’ 94
    A group of 50 ministers representing the most prominent black churches in New York City endorsed Gov. Mario M. Cuomo for re-election yesterday, but only after extracting a promise from Mr. Cuomo to meet with them again after Election Day to discuss appointing more blacks to senior posts, and other concerns.

    March 2015

    CHICAGO — Winning more support from Chicago’s black community, which makes up about one third of the electorate, will be essential if Jesus “Chuy” Garcia is to cause one of the biggest political upsets of recent years by defeating incumbent Rahm Emanuel in a run-off and become Chicago’s first Hispanic mayor.

    and in the same article

    But while in 2011 majority African-American wards gave overwhelming backing to Emanuel, who was previously President Barack Obama’s chief of staff, some disillusionment has set in since. A persistently high crime rate, the decision to close 50 schools in mostly poor areas, and a sense that Emanuel is out of touch with the community and its problems has hurt him among black voters, some political activists say.

    Sept. 93

    David A. Paterson, a state senator from Harlem, has targeted black voters and liberal whites. Democratic leaders in four boroughs — citing the need for a balanced ticket and solidifying their own alliances — support Roberto Ramirez, a state assemblyman from the Bronx, and he is expected to draw many Hispanic votes.

    (and there are dozens more and I could do the same thing for Hispanic voters)

  • The Times aka Der Sturmer is upset with any Jew who does not worship Stalin and Che Guevara.

  • Salomon Lipiner

    Over the past few years the NYT has been ever more critical of
    Israel and ever more sympathetic to the Palestinian cause.
    The editorial policy of the Times has become increasingly tilted toward demonization of Israel and supportive of its primary
    audience which is on the far left. It is no longer the reporter of unspun news.

  • Shalom-Hillel

    The NY TIMES has become unhinged on the subject of Israel. They know Netanyahu is destroying their leftist agenda for the country, aka suicide, so THEY are pulling out all the stops and destroying their credibility in the process. They have become a shrill, leftist megaphone obsessively focused on Israel.

  • Rabbi M. Friedman

    new York Times Toma(impure)has a long history of anti Semitsm. Watch every Thursday 12:00 Noon New York Time go right down to 4 Judaism click on Watch now/Live

  • I wonder if the New York Times has ever considered Genesis 12.3.

    and I wonder if the editorial staff has any concept of the fact that they are under the curse of the God of Israel.

    Fools rush in where angels fear to tread !!!

    sheila bowden

  • Barry

    Why in the world does this planet need another Muslim Arab state when there at least 22 already, the vast majority of which are dysfunctional? And this one, if it ever came into being, would not only be totally dysfunctional but also be violent from day one. I mean, there are already two factions to this “state” both of which would like to murder one another and on top of that, they do not meet any of the criteria the world has required for a state in the past 100 years.

    Memories are short. The first idea of accepting a Palestinian Authority that could one day lead to a state came after Oslo when Israel gave up real land for the promise the Palestinians would forego violence.

    And when Arafat wrote an elegant letter (for him) stating just that, things looked promising. However, the PA never ratified his letter and thus the PA charter still calls for violence against the Jewish state. Nothing has changed in PA land since before Oslo so why would Israel want a state when they got nothing in return, such as recognition and peace.

    And we are supposed to embrace that idea? Yes, we were delusional at one point when we agreed in principle with the idea but reality has showed us something altogether different.

    The idea that the world embraces two states, one for a people only invented in 1964no less, is the height of hypocrisy (and stupidity) that could only come about if one of the states was Jewish and the rest of the world wanted it’s demise.

  • Martin Bookspan

    The Times has an anti-Netanyahu obsession? It has a revolting obsession with spreading hate for Israel. A sometimes respectable newspaper has now become a rotten rag which should see subscription cancellation from every Jew, and advertising cancellation from every Jewish-owned business. A plague on that putrid publication!

  • Fritz Kohlhaas

    What else can expect from a leftist yellow rag like the NYT!

  • HaroldT38

    Well, what do you expect from quisling Jews ?

  • The New York Times has long had a poor name among many of us. During the Holocaust they could have influenced public opinion, but did very little. Like many leading American Reform Jews they refused to rock the boat by speaking up for millions of civilians being gassed and cremated in Europe. Getting things wrong is an ongoing pattern in the NYT, a pattern so strong that even Haaretz is critical!