Dozens Of Journalism Professors Call On New York Times To Hold Independent Review Of Oct. 7 Report

Nearly 60 journalism professors called on the New York Times newspaper Monday to review a controversy-laden report it published alleging that Hamas carried out what it described as a "pattern of rape, mutilation and extreme brutality against women" during its Oct. 7 attack on Israel.

The professors, 59 in total from journalism schools across the US including the University of Southern California, New York University and Northwestern University, said they felt the need to issue a public letter to the newspaper after coming across "compelling reports" challenging the integrity of the Times' story.

"The Times' editorial leadership appears to have largely dismissed these reports and remains silent on important and troubling questions raised about its reporting and editorial processes," the professors wrote in the letter, a copy of which was obtained and posted online by the Washington Post newspaper.

"We believe this inaction is not only harming The Times itself, it also actively endangers journalists, including American reporters working in conflict zones as well as Palestinian journalists (of which, the Committee to Protect Journalists estimates, around 100 have been killed in this conflict so far)," they added.

They urged the Times to "immediately commission a group of journalism experts to conduct a thorough and full independent review of the reporting, editing and publishing processes for this story and release a report of the findings."

The story in question is the Times' Dec. 28, 2023 story 'Screams Without Words': Sexual Violence on Oct. 7. The piece has been a lightning rod for criticism and debate since its publication, including within the Times' newsroom.

The Intercept, a left-wing online news site, published a story Feb. 28 in which they pointed out that the family of one of the slain victims central to the Times' report denied she had been raped. One family member said they had been pressured "under false pretenses" to speak to the media in the first place.

The reporters that worked on the story "mentioned they want to write a report in memory of Gal, and that's it. If we knew that the title would be about rape and butchery, we'd never accept that," Gal Abdush's sister posted on Instagram.

Separately, an update to the story published in March -- a highly unusual timespan for an editorial practice normally conducted within days if not hours of publication -- noted that "newly released video" the newspaper reviewed undercut some details the report relied based on allegations from an Israeli military paramedic.

No correction or retraction was issued in what the professors said was "an unusual decision."

The Intercept reported that inconsistencies in the Times' report led the newspaper to decide against publishing an episode of its The Daily podcast dedicated to the story.

It was authored by two freelancers -- Anat Schwartz and Adam Sella -- and Times staff writer Jeffrey Gettleman. Schwartz is an Israeli filmmaker who had served as an intelligence officer in the Israeli Air Force. Sella is her partner's nephew.

Gettleman "focused on the framing and writing" of the story while Schwartz and Sella did the on-the-ground reporting.

Schwartz had no prior reporting experience before working on the story, and the journalism professors said "some of the most troubling questions hovering over the story relate to the freelancers who reported a great deal of it, especially Anat Schwartz."

"It is important that The New York Times clarify the processes through which these freelancers, especially Schwartz, were vetted and how their work landed on page one," they wrote.

"It appears that extraordinary trust was invested in these individuals and The Times would benefit from publicly explaining the circumstances that justified such unusual reliance on freelancers for such an important story. In the past, The Times has rightly been critical of such reporting arrangements," they added.

The professors pointed to the 2003 resignation of Rick Bragg, a Pulitzer Prize winner who left the paper in disgrace in the wake of what the academics said was "news of his heavy and misguided reliance on an inexperienced freelancer for reporting."

"A statement from The Times that followed the resignation said that 'non-staffers should be used to supplement a correspondent's core reporting; they should not be used to substitute for that reporting,'" they added.

The independent probe called for by the nearly five-dozen professors could find "that The Times did nothing gravely wrong," and in that case "it will be a win not just for The Times but for all journalism," the academics wrote.

"In the worst case, if an investigation does find remarkable errors or negligence in the way the newsroom operated, nothing that The Times would do in response could ever reverse the damage done to Palestine and to Palestinians but The Times could still reverse some of the damage it has done to itself with its silence," they added. -