The New York Times removed a sentence from an article on the Israeli documentary NAZA and added an editor\u2019s note on Wednesday after acknowledging that the wording inadvertently suggested that Israelis\u2019 status as victims of the October 7 massacre was a matter of perception.<\/p>\n
The sentence appeared in a Monday article by NYT correspondent Isabel Kershner examining the backlash in Israel against NAZA, a documentary by Israeli filmmakers<\/a> Yuval Abraham and Rachel Szor that focuses on Palestinian civilian deaths during the war in Gaza.<\/p>\n The original version stated: \u201cBut Israelis still largely view themselves as the victims of Oct. 7.\u201d<\/p>\n The sentence appeared immediately after a passage saying Israelis remained divided over responsibility for the political, military, and intelligence failures<\/a> preceding the Hamas-led attack. The article then noted that around 1,200 people were killed in Israel and approximately 250 were taken hostage on October 7, 2023.<\/p>\n Following criticism of the wording, the NYT deleted the sentence and appended an editor\u2019s note to the article.<\/p>\n \u201cBecause of an editing error, an earlier version of this article included a statement that was intended to convey Israelis\u2019 perception of the government\u2019s military response to the Oct. 7 terror attack in relation to the attacks, but inadvertently suggested that Israelis\u2019 experience as terror victims was a matter of perception. It has been removed from the article,\u201d the note said.<\/p>\n The NYT\u2019s communications account also published the editor\u2019s note on social media on Wednesday.\u00a0<\/p>\n The paper recently faced renewed scrutiny of the newspaper\u2019s coverage of Israel and the Gaza war. A peer-reviewed study published this month<\/a> examined 1,559 NYT articles from the months following October 7 and argued that the newspaper\u2019s coverage disproportionately framed Palestinians as victims and Israel as the aggressor.<\/p>\n The study\u2019s findings and methodology have become part of a broader debate over how international media have covered the war. The study was detailed earlier this week.<\/p>\n