abusesaffiliationarrow-downarrow-leftarrow-rightarrow-upattack-typeblueskyburgerchevron-downchevron-leftchevron-rightchevron-upClock iconclosedeletedevelopment-povertydiscriminationdollardownloademailenvironmentexternal-linkfacebookfilterflaggenderglobeglobegroupshealthC4067174-3DD9-4B9E-AD64-284FDAAE6338@1xinformation-outlineinformationinstagraminvestment-trade-globalisationissueslabourlanguagesShapeCombined Shapeline, chart, up, arrow, graphLinkedInlocationmap-pinminusnewsorganisationotheroverviewpluspreviewArtboard 185profilerefreshIconnewssearchsecurityPathStock downStock steadyStock uptagticktooltiptriangletwitteruniversalitywebwhatsappxIcons / Social / YouTube

這頁面沒有繁體中文版本,現以English顯示

文章

2023年11月9日

作者:
Tom Tapp, Deadline

USA: Media workers occupy New York Times building accusing it of "laundering genocide" in Palestine; Incl. Co. comment

New York Times Building

"Pro-Palestinian Protesters Occupy New York Times Building Lobby As Thousands March Through Midtown Manhattan"

Pro-Palestinian demonstrators who were a part of a larger protest in Midtown Manhattan entered the New York Times building and occupied the lobby tonight.

It began when what looked like thousands of demonstrators carrying Palestinian flags and signs that read “Free Palestine” and “End the Occupation Now,” gathered outside the building, chanting “shut it down” in unison...

Per the Washington Post, the group was led by a group of media workers called Writers Bloc. Once inside, members of the group read the names of thousands of Palestinians killed in Gaza since the war began.

They dropped versions of “The New York War Crimes,” a mock newspaper. The pamphlet accused media with “complicity in laundering genocide.” It also demanded that the Gray Lady publicly back a ceasefire in Gaza.

A statement obtained from the paper by the New York Daily News read, “The New York Times has extensively covered the Israel-Hamas war with fairness, impartiality, and an abiding understanding of the complexities of the conflict…We fully support this group’s right to express their point of view, even as we disagree with their characterization of our coverage.”