When the International Court of Justice issued an order on January 26 in the “genocide” case between South Africa and Israel, it soon became common knowledge that the ICJ had found it “plausible” that Israel was committing “genocide.” This common knowledge, however, was in fact a myth.
A CNN graphic, and the preceding text, suggests that the daily average number of trucks bringing food into Gaza now is less than half of what it was before October 7. In fact, the truth is precisely the opposite. Substantially more trucks are bringing food into Gaza today than were a year ago.
In the world of journalism, there are understandable errors, and then there are the types of errors that make you wonder whether the journalists are living in the same reality.
If CNN can’t be relied upon to produce an accurate picture of the facts, or to give the proper analysis of those facts, then can CNN be relied upon as a serious journalistic entity at all?
That The Los Angeles Times cannot or will not substantiate a toxic charge redolent of an age-old bigoted trope demonizing Jews as child killers is particularly troubling in this period of unprecedented antisemitism.
First, the article spills large amounts of ink to link Israel to tragedies, while omitting or glossing over the existence and responsibility of other parties. Second, the article employs a curious double standard as to informing readers of when the network was “unable to verify” details being reported. Third, the background of one of the journalists himself raises questions of a conflict of interest.
CNN bewilderingly decided to amplify an antisemite’s horrific allegations against the Jewish state, notwithstanding they lacked any supporting evidence, and without mentioning her extraordinary bias on the subject.
As CAMERA has repeatedly documented, there is a pattern of CNN reports lobbing horrific allegations at Israel based on exceedingly thin evidence and lots of insinuation. It’s a standard, or practice, akin to tabloid journalism – a standard certainly not appropriate for serious journalism or serious accusations like that of war crimes.
To make such an eye-popping claim in the headline based solely on one man’s hearsay is irresponsible journalism. It comes across as either clickbait or an effort to advance a partisan narrative.
Given CNN’s fondness for investigations, one is left to wonder: why isn’t CNN devoting any substantial effort to holding UNRWA to account by asking the hard questions of the agency?
