Bad reporting is serious business

Truth is the first casualty in war, they say.

They also talk about the fog of war.

Both cliches are true, but people who are paid to disseminate information are supposed to exercise caution.

There is an adage in journalism that goes like this: “Get it first, but first get it right.”

It is more honored now in the breech, it seems.

Everyone seems to be racing against the Internet, and, even worse, social media.

That may be why The New York Times posted a story Tuesday with a headline that read like this (Not a quote because I can’t find the original): Israel bombs Gaza hospital, Hamas says.

The story did attribute the claim, which turned out to be false, to Hamas. Journalism norms call for attributing information to “authority,” but there’s a big difference here.

1- While Hamas is an “authority,” it also has a long  history of lying. 

Even with the attribution, it was a terrible mistake because the Times should have known

2- The headline was atop an unverified story  that was a fuse that would cause explosions all across the Arab world. And crazy protests in the U.S., and elsewhere, over a lie.

That was completely predictable because the Arab world is notably short on objective journalism and notably long on violent emotion.

Posting that story, with that headline, was deeply irresponsible. The Times got it first, but got it wrong. Some other outlets did the same.

They behaved no better than shit-for-brains U.S. Rep Rashida Tlaib, who tweeted out the lie and threatened the Democratic president. U.S. Rep Ilhan Omar said something similar.

On the radio front, Rich Zeoli on WPHT/1210-AM fumed Wednesday afternoon that the “corporate media” was buying into the lie of the hospital being bombed when the only thing bombed was  a parking lot.

What?

It seemed unbelievable to me, but another journalism adage says, “Check it out.”

I messaged Zeoli and he responded that the Wall Street Journal carried a story saying what he said, and said he read it on the air. He said the story said the missile, which came from the Arab side, when it landed did not hit the hospital itself, but landed alongside and did a lot of damage.

When I tried to find that story, I found a much more recent Wall Street Journal story saying the hospital was bombed.

In reading many stories in what Zeoli calls the “corporate media” (he is employed by Audacity, not a mom and pop operation) I saw the reporting came mostly from reporters not in Gaza, and therefore were getting their info second hand.

Zeoli provided several other stories that supported his belief in the parking lot angle.

By now, it is pretty well established that Israel did not fire the missile that struck near the hospital, the explosion did not destroy the hospital, and many people apparently died. It turns out the early reporting was, once again, wrong.

One other point: In the early hours after the Oct. 7 slaughter, word circulated that 40 Jewish babies had been beheaded.

Again, what?

My mind flashed to the 1991 liberation of Kuwait, called Operation Desert Sabre, in which there were early reports that Iraqi occupiers had killed hundreds of babies in Kuwait hospitals. Hundreds of babies in a nation as small as Kuwait? 

It didn’t pass the smell test, and it was later proved to be propaganda.

There has been no verification of the 40 baby massacre, but harm has been done.

Yes, babies were killed, but there was no mass beheadings, but I have seen pro-Palestinians holding posters saying, “Beheading Babies is Israeli Lies.”

I’m not sure the rumor started with Israel, but now the other side uses that false report to cast doubt on anything Israel says. [Update: The first report came from the IDF, but the government later disavowed it.]

False stories do hurt.