Wednesday, August 10th | 14 Av 5782

March 14, 2017 3:19 pm

New York Times Corrects Editorial About Israeli Settlements

avatar by Ira Stoll

The settlement bloc of Ariel in the West Bank (Judea-Samaria). Photo: Wikipedia.

The settlement bloc of Ariel in the West Bank (Judea-Samaria). Photo: Wikipedia.

A recent piece for the Algemeiner called out an inaccuracy in a New York Times editorial about the legality of Israel’s settlements in the West Bank. I wrote:

[A]n otherwise ridiculous (for reasons we’ll get to some other time) New York Times editorial insists, “The United States, Israel’s strongest military supporter, has consistently held that settlement building in the occupied territories is illegal and detrimental to seeking a lasting peace.” The “illegal” part is not even true (or at least it wasn’t until the Obama administration threw Israel under the bus at the UN Security Council).

The New York Times has now issued a correction of that part of the editorial:

Correction: March 10, 2017

Related coverage

August 10, 2022 12:24 pm

Restoring Libya’s Ancient Jewish Community

The Libyan Jewish community was one of the world’s oldest Jewish communities, with some historians tracing the Jewish settlement there...

An earlier version of this editorial incorrectly stated the United States’ position on settlement building in the occupied territories. It has been highly critical of the activity, but has not consistent held it to be illegal. [sic].

The Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America commended the Times for publishing the correction and said it had contacted the Times about the error, though it also pointed out, “A second erroneous claim in the editorial was not corrected.” The media watchdog group claimed credit for prompting the correction.

The correction has so far appeared only online and not in print editions of the newspaper, though the original error appeared in both print and online versions of the editorial. Maybe if the correction does appear in print, the paper will fix the language so that it says “consistently” rather than “consistent.”

If anything is consistent, it’s the New York Times‘ ability, consistently, to get the facts wrong in writing about this stuff.

More of Ira Stoll’s media critique, a regular Algemeiner feature, can be found here.


The opinions presented by Algemeiner bloggers are solely theirs and do not represent those of The Algemeiner, its publishers or editors. If you would like to share your views with a blog post on The Algemeiner, please be in touch through our Contact page.

Share this Story: Share On Facebook Share On Twitter

Let your voice be heard!

Join the Algemeiner

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.