> Schwartz said as much in an interview with Israeli Army Radio on December 31. “The New York Times said, ‘Let’s do an investigation into sexual violence’ — it was more a case of them having to convince me,” she said. Her host cut her off: “It was a proposal of The New York Times, the entire thing?”

> The bigger scandal may be the reporting itself, the process that allowed it into print, and the life-altering impact the reporting had for thousands of Palestinians whose deaths were justified by the alleged systematic sexual violence orchestrated by Hamas the paper claimed to have exposed

https://theintercept.com/2024/02/28/new-york-times-anat-schw...

Surely the NYT would verify, right?

And of course the WaPo has no conflicts of interest being owned by Bezos either

NYT, WaPo, etc aren't very likely to publish it. It'd be in the same bucket as Jeff Epstein - politically toxic and the majors aren't going to take the lead drawing attention to it even if it is plausible. Facts would need to be in the public sphere for a while and gaining traction before they pick it up.

It might be the Iranians making stuff up, although realistically that sort of activity is what should be expected without any leaks at all. It has been obvious since around 2016 that the corporate media doesn't have the ability to single-handily dominate the narrative any more and that will impact national security propaganda because, you know, what military would be stupid enough to leave that sort of messaging to chance?

> NYT, WaPo, etc would disclose whether they had been able to verify the source or authenticity

Oh yeah, like the verification of their stories of the oven babies

If anything, this whole ordeal has shown that all media is at some level censored and controlled by special interests behind the scenes

We’ve been living in a post-truth world for a long time, way before AI