This Is The Revered NYT

 https://x.com/geraldposner/status/2075036562543288666?s=51&t=cLq01Oy84YkmYPZ-URIMYw

" The journalism rule I live by For four decades, across thirteen books and articles for the NY Times, the New Yorker, the Washington Post, the Wall Street Journal, Newsweek, and other legacy outlets, I never got to publish anything of consequence alleging wrongdoing without two independent, credible sources. On the most sensitive material, a lawyer also cleared it before it ran. That discipline is not an editor's whim. It is the only thing that separates journalism from advocacy. Nicholas Kristof's May 11 Times column, alleging Israel used dogs and carrots to rape Palestinian prisoners, was published without that discipline. It leaned on anonymous and Hamas-affiliated sourcing. It ran in Opinion, not News. The reaction was immediate and severe: Israel's foreign ministry branded it a blood libel, Prime Minister Netanyahu threatened legal action, and the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations formally condemned it. At the time, the Times stood behind it and moved on. Now, more than a year later, we finally have the internal answer everyone in the business has been waiting for. Executive editor Joe Kahn, in a podcast interview with Peter Kafka, said plainly of the column: "It wasn't edited by the newsroom." Pressed on whether the news division would have run it, Kahn first offered "we probably wouldn't have," then corrected himself to something firmer: "No, we wouldn't have done that exact piece." Read that again. The most senior news editor at the New York Times is telling the public that his own newsroom's standards would have kept the piece off the page. That is an admission that the sourcing and verification process opinion editor Kathleen Kingsbury described in May — "a rigorous vetting process," fact-checked, reviewed by standards and legal, with "no errors" found — did not meet the bar the news side actually applies to comparable claims. Two senior Times editors, a year apart, describing the same piece in irreconcilable terms. One says it was properly vetted. The other says his newsroom wouldn't have touched it. Both cannot be right, and nobody at the paper has explained the gap. That is the real story here. Not the politics of Israel and Gaza, which will be argued forever. The story is a fundamental journalism failure — a serious accusation published without the sourcing threshold that any accusation of that gravity requires — and now, finally, confirmed from inside the building."