Week's worth of stories censored by NY Times, Wash. Post


Week’s worth of stories censored by NY Times, Wash. Post
Leo Rennert
American Thinker

The following stories – in the span of a week – were widely disseminated. But none made it into the news pages of the New York Times and the Washington Post. It’s all too familiar pattern that points to a biased pro-Paletinian, anti-Israel agenda in their news coverage.

Let’s take a look at what these two major newspapers did not seem fit to print:

So why did the Times and the Post engage in such conspicuous self-censorship? Because their editors and reporters are determined to paint Israel as the main obstacle to the peace process, while hiding the darker, anti-peace aspects of the Palestinian side – both Hamas in Gaza and Mahmoud Abbas and his Fatah party in the West Bank.

Spike’s been busy working in support of the Hate-Israel narrative.


Ok so a newspapers decides not to run these stories and that makes them anti-Israel? Please Pete if I am missing something then please let me know. From reading the article all I got was that this person writing it thinks that these 2 newspapers have a agenda by no printing these stories. My grandmother used to work for our local newspaper and there are tons of articles that never make it into their newspaper. Does this also make them biased against what ever they refuse or decided no to print?


But don’t you think that the stories they choose not to print is an indicator of where their loyalties lie?


No. There are tons of things that our local newspaper dos not print. It does not make them anti anything for not posting it. What a newspaper prints is up to them not us. If you don’t like what they print or don’t prints then find a new newspaper. Jumping to conclusions just because they didn’t pints those articles is just plain stupid. Our local newspaper didn’t report on a recent drug bust but that doesn’t make them supporters of drugs and drug users now does it?


I thought the NYT being Anti-Semitic was old news. In fact I thought the fact that they use censorship regularly to perpetuate all the extreme leftist ideas of the editorial staff was well know also.

Apparently there are still a few people who think the NYT reports “news”?


The operative word, Sera, is “pattern”. As technoids say: once is an accident; twice is a coincidence; thrice is a pattern. I’m actually less optimistic in my work when I see the same thing twice. Early pattern recognition is a key to responding to recurring problems early. Rennert pointed out 8 spiked stories and the common effect arising from each story spiking. But if you don’t want to see a pattern …


Ok so the local paper not reporting about every kill made by hunters must mean it is anti-hunting then right? Don’t get me wrong I don’t read these papers or read from there site but saying that they are anti this or that becasue they do not run articles on a certain subject in my eyes doesn’t make them against it in my eyes. You need more than just speculation to convince me. you cant expect a newspaper to print every story that it comes across.


Oh, but were all the other papers in the area reporting all those kills? This was part of the discussion - they were spiking stories that were big enough for everyone else to print.


Ok so the local paper not reporting about every …

To be valid, an analogy should be analogous. First, the NYT and WashPost aren’t local papers, they are major national outlets. Next, the NYT and WashPost position themselves as serious sources of international news and commentary. Third, the NYT and WashPost pick microscopic and imaginary nits, when doing so makes Israel out to be the “bad guy”; meanwhile, these significant stories that reflect badly on the Arab Palis got ignored. I was raised in a small-medium sized town. The local paper had more important local stories to cover than Farmer Fitz’s or Farnham’s latest duck season successes.