Photo Credit: Serge Attal/Flash90

For those seeking to explain to Americans who don’t know what type of newspaper Haaretz is, in terms of its political orientation and its perspective on lsrael, Israel supporters will typically explain it as the New York Times of Israel. And they don’t mean that as a compliment.

The same is true in the other direction: the New York Times is the Haaretz of the United States.

Advertisement

What this shorthand means is that the two papers are frequently viewed (mostly by their own readers) as the paper of the elite, the intellectuals, the academics. And it also means that the two papers are consistently unflattering to Israel – even at the expense of accuracy – whenever possible.

For abundant examples, just take a visual tour through CAMERA’s website. CAMERA, the Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America, has expanded its reach and not only monitors U.S. media sites for inaccuracies regarding Israel, it also monitors the press in Britain, Spain, and now in Israel.

But both leftist papers have been struggling economically over the past several years. One astonishing fact revealed at a CAMERA event held in Jerusalem earlier this week revealed that only 4.8 percent of Israelis read Haaretz – an infinitesimally small number, especially compared to the high regard in which Haaretz holds itself.

So it was less of a shock than it might otherwise have been, but still a surprise to see that the New York Times has now officially teamed up, at least in terms of subscription piggybacking, with Haaretz.

Notices were sent out to those on the New York Times email list offering a special: all New York Times readers can now get a 40 percent discount on a one-year subscription to Haaretz, and the new subscribers will pay only $1 for the first month of the subscription.

In addition to revealing how desperate both papers are for additional subscribers, it is worth noting that even people who only subscribe to online news alerts from the Times received the offer. In other words, it is not a stretch to believe that the Times includes those alert-only subscribers in reporting to advertisers the number of its subscribers, thereby inflating the numbers.

But here’s a question: why would readers of the New York Times want a subscription to Haaretz? They are already receiving all the negatively-slanted information about the Middle East from the Times.

Advertisement

20 COMMENTS

  1. I would NOT subscribe to both these arch stupid papers who have such high regard for …themselves as all idiots do, even if the PAID ME!!! The word "intellectual" was invented by communists so it is considered as communist intellect not intelligent people as they would like to make us believe. They think only of the LIES they can imagine not as intelligent people would do but as PARROTS and supporters of the communist party which hates Israel because it did not join them.

  2. I unsubscribed to the New York Times Newsletter because of its rabid antisemitism and anti Israel stance. I'm an American and when I was little, I used to fight with my father and sister to be the first to get the Sunday Times. I subscribed for say 30 years. I never read anything that trashy, lying and subjective piece of garbage publishes. Its a disgrace to the word Journalism. NYC's only half way decent paper is the Wall Street Journal and that is a liberal arm too. Haaretz is the Israeli version of the New York Times. Both should change their names to the Self Hating Jewish Journal.

  3. Sheldon Adelson is reported to be interested in buying the New York Times. If that happens, I will subscribe. However, this is a fantasy too good to be true. The Times Board, given its subjectivity, anstisemitism and anti Israel mania, would never sell to a proud Jew and supporter of Israel. The paper will die. It can't keep up with the internet.

  4. when i was growing up in new york in the nineteen fifties we would always end a debate on anything by saying "i read it in the nytimes". several years ago i began to realize with horror that the ny times had become some sort of anti semitic screed and a supporter of anything and anyone who hated Israel and wanted to see it destroyed. it was a sickening and nauseating realization. today, i would not wipe a dirty toilet with the nyt imes as it would make it dirtier.

  5. Susan Finkenberg refers to the Wall Street Journal as a "liberal arm too." Perhaps, she should read the paper more carefully. The paper has criticized President Obama in every way possible, has consistently supported the Republicans, and the columnists are almost all entirely very conservative.

Comments are closed.

Loading Facebook Comments ...