- Four entities, including UN Human Rights and the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, never acknowledged Hamas’ sexual brutalization of Israeli women.
- Of the total 202 posts examined, 106 (52%) mourned the situation in Gaza only, and only 12 (6%) specifically condemned Hamas’ sexual atrocities
- More than half of the 12 specific condemnations were posted in December — two months after the attack.
Read the full story here.
The New York Times unveiled an investigation last week acknowledging the “pattern of rape, mutilation and extreme brutality against women” in Hamas’ attack on Israel.
The piece unflinchingly describes the horror of Hamas’ actions, including eyewitness accounts of women being gang-raped, mutilated, and killed by Hamas soldiers.
The Times should be commended for highlighting Hamas’ brutality — but why did it take so long?
While the story includes original interviews and details, it largely echoes evidence documented by Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) as early as October 8 and eyewitness testimony brought before the United Nations in December.
The authors repeatedly note the Times “independently verified” evidence of Hamas’ sexual brutality, seeming to suggest the paper required extra time to check the story’s facts before publishing it.
One might wish it’d taken the same care on October 17 when it erroneously reported that Israel had bombed a hospital in Gaza.
Apparently deeming the event “breaking news,” the Times’ story heavily relied on Hamas’ accusation that Israel had struck the hospital — with no independent verification.
But Hamas had lied. U.S authorities quickly confirmed that a misfired Palestinian rocket had caused the blast, rather than an Israeli bomb.
The Times quietly shifted its headline to reflect the truth — from “Israeli Strike Kills Hundreds in Hospital” to “At Least 500 Dead In Strike on Gaza Hospital,” to “At Least 500 Dead in Blast at Gaza Hospital,” — but the wave of false information echoed online for days.
The topics news organizations choose to cover, and when they choose to cover them, illustrate hidden biases in even the most “objective” institutions.
For reasons unknown, Hamas’ sexual brutality did not meet the threshold of breaking news — something to be reported on without initial verification.
Nor was the IDF’s evidence and documentation of Hamas’ atrocities, it seems, deemed as credible as the terrorist organization’s claims that Israel has bombed a hospital.
The result of the Times’ opaque rubric for prioritizing stories? A detailed account of hundreds of women raped, butchered and murdered — three months too late.
More articles and resources: