Quaker group halts New York Times ads over ‘Gaza genocide’ language dispute

Palestinians inspect the site of an Israeli strike on a house, amid the ongoing conflict between Israel and Hamas, in Nuseirat, central Gaza Strip, Jan. 9, 2025. (Reuters)
Short Url
Updated 09 January 2025
Follow

Quaker group halts New York Times ads over ‘Gaza genocide’ language dispute

  • American Friends Service Committee claims newspaper asked it to replace word ‘genocide’ with ‘war’
  • Proposed ad urged US Congress to ‘stop arming Israel’s genocide in Gaza’

LONDON: An American Quaker group has paused its advertisements with the New York Times after the newspaper refused to allow the use of the term “genocide” to describe Israel’s actions in Gaza.

“The refusal of the New York Times to run paid digital ads that call for an end to Israel’s genocide in Gaza is an outrageous attempt to sidestep the truth,” said Joyce Ajlouny, general secretary of the American Friends Service Committee, a Quaker organization that advocates for peace.

“Palestinians and allies have been silenced and marginalized in the media for decades as these institutions choose silence over accountability. It is only by challenging this reality that we can hope to forge a path toward a more just and equitable world.”

The controversy arose after the AFSC submitted an ad with the text: “Tell Congress to stop arming Israel’s genocide in Gaza now! As a Quaker organization, we work for peace. Join us. Tell the president and Congress to stop the killing and starvation in Gaza.”

The New York Times’ advertising team reportedly requested that the AFSC replace the word “genocide” with “war.” When the AFSC refused, the newspaper’s ad acceptability team said that “differing views on the situation” required adherence to “factual accuracy and legal standards” to ensure compliance with its guidelines.

A spokesperson for the New York Times said in response to questions from The Guardian in the UK: “New York Times advertising works with parties submitting proposed ads to ensure they are in compliance with our acceptability guidelines.

“This instance was no different, and is entirely in line with the standards we apply to all ad submissions.”

However, the AFSC strongly criticized the decision, pointing out that many human rights organizations, legal scholars, and even the UN have described Israel’s actions in Gaza as genocide or genocidal acts.

“The suggestion that the New York Times couldn’t run an ad against Israel’s genocide in Gaza because there are ‘differing views’ is absurd,” said Layne Mullett, director of media relations for the AFSC.

“The New York Times advertises a wide variety of products and advocacy messages on which there are differing views. Why is it not acceptable to publicize the meticulously documented atrocities committed by Israel and paid for by the United States?”

The AFSC also pointed to The Washington Post’s recent decision to run an Amnesty International ad that also used the term genocide, questioning why the New York Times applied different standards.

The Quaker group has been involved in humanitarian work in Gaza since 1948 and currently operates in Gaza, Ramallah, and Jerusalem. Since October 2023, the AFSC’s staff in Gaza have provided 1.5 million meals, hygiene kits, and other essential aid to displaced individuals. The organization is also lobbying for a permanent ceasefire, full humanitarian access, the release of captives, and an end to US military funding for Israel.

According to The Guardian, the New York Times has previously run advertisements using the term genocide.

In 2016, it published an ad from the Armenian Educational Foundation thanking Kim Kardashian for opposing denial of the Armenian genocide. In 2008, presidential candidates Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and John McCain co-signed a letter advertisement in the New York Times calling out the genocide in Sudan’s Darfur.

It also noted that while the New York Times reserves the right to reject ads it deems inaccurate or deceptive, its advertising guidelines state that “advertising space is open to all points of view” and submissions may be subject to fact-checking.


BBC says will fight Trump's $10 bn defamation lawsuit

Updated 19 min 36 sec ago
Follow

BBC says will fight Trump's $10 bn defamation lawsuit

LONDON: The BBC said Tuesday it would fight a $10-billion lawsuit brought by US President Donald Trump against the British broadcaster over a documentary that edited his 2021 speech ahead of the US Capitol riot.
“As we have made clear previously, we will be defending this case,” a BBC spokesperson said in a statement sent to AFP, adding the company would not be making “further comment on ongoing legal proceedings.”
The lawsuit, filed in federal court in Miami, seeks “damages in an amount not less than $5,000,000,000” for each of two counts against the British broadcaster, for alleged defamation and violation of the Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act.
The video that triggered the lawsuit spliced together two separate sections of Trump’s speech on January 6, 2021 in a way that made it appear he explicitly urged supporters to attack the Capitol, where lawmakers were certifying Joe Biden’s 2020 election win.
The lawsuit comes as the UK government on Tuesday launched the politically sensitive review of the BBC’s Royal Charter, which outlines the corporation’s funding and governance and needs to be renewed in 2027.
As part of the review, it launched a public consultation on issues including the role of “accuracy” in the BBC’s mission and contentious reforms to the corporation’s funding model, which currently relies on a mandatory fee for anyone in the country who watches television.
Minister Stephen Kinnock stressed after the lawsuit was filed that the UK government “is a massive supporter of the BBC.”
The BBC has “been very clear that there is no case to answer in terms of Mr.Trump’s accusation on the broader point of libel or defamation. I think it’s right the BBC stands firm on that point,” Kinnock told Sky News on Tuesday.
Trump, 79, had said the lawsuit was imminent, claiming the BBC had “put words in my mouth,” even positing that “they used AI or something.”
The documentary at issue aired last year before the 2024 election, on the BBC’s “Panorama” flagship current affairs program.

Apology letter 

“The formerly respected and now disgraced BBC defamed President Trump by intentionally, maliciously, and deceptively doctoring his speech in a brazen attempt to interfere in the 2024 Presidential Election,” a spokesperson for Trump’s legal team said in a statement to AFP.
“The BBC has a long pattern of deceiving its audience in coverage of President Trump, all in service of its own leftist political agenda,” the statement added.
The British Broadcasting Corporation, whose audience extends well beyond the United Kingdom, faced a period of turmoil last month after a media report brought renewed attention to the edited clip.
The scandal led the BBC director general, Tim Davie, and the organization’s top news executive, Deborah Turness, to resign.
Trump’s lawsuit says the edited speech in the documentary was “fabricated and aired by the Defendants one week before the 2024 Presidential Election in a brazen attempt to interfere in and influence the Election’s outcome to President Trump’s detriment.”
The BBC has denied Trump’s claims of legal defamation, though BBC chairman Samir Shah has sent Trump a letter of apology.
Shah also told a UK parliamentary committee last month the broadcaster should have acted sooner to acknowledge its mistake after the error was disclosed in a memo, which was leaked to The Daily Telegraph newspaper.
The BBC lawsuit is the latest in a string of legal actions Trump has taken against media companies in recent years, several of which have led to multi-million-dollar settlements.