The Washington Post was one among many media outlets that carried, without questioning, the story put out by Hamas claiming that the IDF had shot and killed 31 Gazans as they were waiting to receive food at a distribution center near Rafah. Israel denied the charge. And of course such a charge makes no sense. Israel has been moving heaven and earth to get the Gazans to come to distribution centers and to receive the aid Israel has brought, without Hamas being able to steal any of it. Why would the Israelis then want to shoot to kill, and destroy the very program they are so eager to see succeed? The terror group Hamas, however, wants the humanitarian aid provided by Israel to fail; Hamas has never hesitated, when it suited it, to fire on Gazan civilians, as the terror group did recently in Beit Lahiya, where Gazans dared to come out to protest Hamas’ despotic rule and the misery the terror group had brought them.
After the Post published a story about the IDF killing 31 Gazans waiting for aid — a story that came straight from Hamas — it realized it had not bothered to give “appropriate weight” to the IDF’s vigorous denial of the story, and issued a correction. More on the WaPo’s original story, and the retraction it then published after two million readers had seen the previous, scandalously incomplete, version, can be found here: “Washington Post retracts Gaza aid report, says it failed to meet ‘fairness standards,'” Jerusalem Post, June 4, 2025:
The Washington Post on Tuesday filed a correction to a recent article claiming the IDF killed over 30 people near an aid site in Gaza, naming the source as “health officials.”
The article, published Sunday and viewed over two million times before the correction, was changed because the Washington Post claimed it “didn’t meet Post fairness standards.”
According to a social media post on X/Twitter, the article “failed to make clear if attributing the deaths to Israel was the position of the Gaza health ministry or a fact verified by The Post.”
It was the former, and not the latter.
Although the original article included statements from Israel, including an initial inquiry indicating IDF soldiers did not fire at civilians at the aid centers, the newspaper admitted it didn’t “give proper weight to Israel’s denial and gave improper certitude about what was known about any Israeli role in the shootings.”
The GHF has proved the IDF did not fire at civilians at aid centers
The Gaza Humanitarian Foundation distribution center in Rafah denied on Sunday claims that the IDF attacked a food distribution point near Rafah, contradicting widely circulated Hamas reports.
Security camera footage from Sunday’s aid distribution site shows calm civilian activity, with no incidents reported. Aid was delivered without disruption…
Remember that the damage was done by the time the Washington Post issued its “correction” two days after the original story. Two million people read, as fact, that the IDF had “killed 31 people” at the distribution center near Rafah. How many of those two million, do you think, will have read the subsequent correction? When was the last time you bothered to read a “correction” to a story in any newspaper? And even for many of those readers who did so, wouldn’t they likely think that “pro-Israel pressure groups” must have made the Post take back the original story, but we know the first version was true; the trigger-happy IDF keeps Gazans in line by shooting dead a few dozen. Hamas wouldn’t kill its own people, but as for the genocidal Israelis, they’re already killed tens of thousands of women and children, they’re capable of anything.
One more black eye for Israel, all because the major media — in this case the Washington Post — would rather believe Hamas, a terror group, and disbelieve the IDF, the “most moral army in the world,” according to British Colonel Richard Kemp. The media prefers to disbelieve that “Israel has done more and implemented more measures to prevent civilian harm than any military in the history of urban warfare,” as says West Point Professor John Spencer. That’s how bad things have become for Israel, given a world seemingly determined to be eyeless in Gaza. And this unhappy episode is one more demonstration of Mark Twain’s celebrated remark: “A lie can travel half-way round the world, while the truth is still putting on its shoes.”
somehistory says
When newspapers were actually paper, the headline would be on the front page in bold type.
Any retractions which indicated that the paper’s editors/reporters had made mistakes, would usually be printed in small type on some page near the back of the paper.
I can recall a few examples from the past, so I know for certain that was the way they operated.
Now, it’s all online and people read the headlines, get the ideas, and spread it without ever going back to see if there were updates, changes or retractions.
This time, the lies helped produce violence in other places.
Wellington says
WaPo, along with The New York Times, won a Pulitzer for reporting on the phony Steele Dossier, paid for by the 2016 Clinton campaign it should be noted, which WaPo (and the NYT) treated as rooted in fact pertaining to President Trump’s collusion with Russia, even though said dossier was a total lie, fabricated by the Democratic Party to smear Trump. You’d think if WaPo had any integrity left (it doesn’t) it would have returned this Pulitzer.
Hasn’t—and my prediction is it never will because newspapers like WaPo and the NYT are Leftist rags which deserve no respect. Indeed, they should be accorded nothing but contempt. Count me in here.
James Lincoln says
Wellington,
An excellent and fact-based post.
My compliments.
Wellington says
Thank you, James. There was a time when I read The New York Times on a regular basis. That time has passed.
Rick Gordon says
Many, at least me for sure, have given up on expecting to find objective news reporting from these sources – WaPo, NYT, BBC, CNN, Guardian, PBS, NPR, New Yorker, FOX, Vanity Fair, and the list keeps growing. AllSides.com and some others publish a bias rating – much I agree with – not all – but at least it’s a starting data point. It’s not the media world of the 60s anymore!
࿗Infidel࿘ says
As Greg Gutfeld pointed out, that’s how corrections work in newspapers. The original false reporting is there, in big block letters on pg A1, but the retractions (never an apology) appear on pg C3. So that people who read the original canard are never disabused of the notion. He said this in the context of Jake Tapper’s book tour, pointing out that this was the first time that the mea culpa appeared on page 1
I get the habit of some elderly people to want their newspapers first thing in the morning. But please, learn from your grandkids how to explore online news, even from these sources, and start exploring. For instance, I used to be hooked on Fox News, but nowadays, it’s mainly podcasts (although I do watch The Five and some other Fox segment on YouTube as well). That way, regardless of whether you’re on the Left or Right, you get to aggregate your sources of info, and are less likely to be as misinformed
skeptiker says
Sitzen in den Redaktionsstuben eigentlich nur noch schlechte Schauspieler die das journalistische Handwerk nur noch vom Hörensagen kennen ?
Bret says
This has been the msm modus operandi for decades. Report whatever they want or need to further promote, and protect the insane leftist ideology. Millions read the initial “mistake “ and no one reads nor remembers the “apology “!! They know what they are doing!!
Bret says
The mainstream media’s modus operandi. Report anything that they believe helps their leftist agenda, apologize for the lie later where no one will see the apology. Then millions of ignorant democrat voters still believe the story.