The Los Angeles Times finds itself embroiled in a fresh controversy, this time centered around a photo caption that has enraged members of the Jewish community. The caption, published alongside an article about funding for synagogue security, has been condemned as blatantly antisemitic and reflective of a larger bias within the paper’s newsroom.
Caption Triggers Boycott Calls
The incident stems from a July 3rd story covering a Los Angeles City Council proposal to allocate $1 million towards increased security for synagogues and other religious institutions. This proposal arose in the wake of a highly publicized confrontation at a local synagogue, Adas Torah, where pro-Palestinian protestors clashed with Jewish counter-protestors. The incident garnered national attention and drew condemnation from city officials and the President.
The controversial caption, accompanying a photograph of protestors at City Hall, described the funding as support for “Pro-Israel vigilante/security companies for Zionist defense training.” This characterization sparked outrage within the Jewish community, with many objecting to the inaccurate portrayal of established Jewish charities.
Sam Yebri, a prominent Jewish activist, vehemently criticized the caption, highlighting its bias against legitimate security concerns. Yebri emphasized the long-standing, non-political nature of the targeted organizations. One of the groups, The Jewish Federation, with roots predating the State of Israel, offers a wide range of social services, including food programs and youth summer camps. The other nonprofits specialize in security training for Jewish businesses and schools, responding to a concerning rise in antisemitic violence across the nation.
“The safety of Jewish Angelenos shouldn’t be politicized or linked to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict,” Yebri asserts.
The Times initially attributed the caption to an accidental publication of an unfinished draft. Following social media backlash, a correction was issued, albeit one deemed insufficient by many Jewish readers. The revised caption acknowledged the proposal’s focus on “pro-Israel security companies” rather than “vigilante groups,” but failed to address the broader concerns.
The pattern of Biased Reporting?
This incident adds fuel to the fire of accusations against the Times regarding biased coverage, particularly concerning the recent Israel-Gaza conflict. Critics point to past articles, such as an op-ed defending protestors wearing masks, as evidence of this slant.
Internal tensions surrounding the Gaza conflict were allegedly a contributing factor to the departure of former executive editor Kevin Merida in January. Over three dozen Times reporters signed a statement criticizing Israel’s actions in Gaza while neglecting to hold Hamas accountable. Merida’s subsequent 90-day restriction on these journalists from covering the conflict further escalated tensions, culminating in a clash with the paper’s owner and his daughter, both with known pro-Palestinian sentiments.
Yebri argues for a pervasive anti-Israeli and increasingly anti-Jewish bias within the Times, citing instances of utilizing unverified Hamas casualty figures, quoting fringe pro-Palestinian Jewish activists to falsely represent the views of American Jewry, and neglecting Palestinian aggression.
