Shareholder Presses NYT for Records Over Israel Coverage and Platner Reporting
A New York Times shareholder, backed by an expanded legal team, is demanding board-level records over the paper’s Israel coverage and reporting on Democratic Senate candidate Graham Platner
Jewish Onliner is an independent publication. If you find our work valuable, please consider becoming a paid subscriber.
A shareholder in The New York Times Company is pressing the publisher to turn over internal “books and records” for an investigation into whether the company’s board failed to oversee editorial standards after a string of contested news reports and opinion pieces.
The dispute, detailed in a Washington Free Beacon report and the underlying July 14 demand letter, could move to court if the company neither produces the requested records nor commits in writing to a concrete production schedule by July 21.
The demand was made on behalf of the National Center for Public Policy Research, which the demand letter identifies as a beneficial shareholder of the company. According to the letter, the legal effort now includes the National Jewish Advocacy Center, Grant & Eisenhofer, Schall, Brown & Schwartz, and Schoen Law Firm.
Focus on Israel Coverage and Editorial Standards
The shareholder demand asks for board and committee minutes, materials, presentations and reports concerning editorial oversight, along with reports, escalations or communications sent to the board or its committees about specified coverage controversies.
It specifically seeks documents related to several stories that drew public scrutiny, including the Times’s coverage of Israel, the spouses of Democratic politicians, and the Maine Senate race involving Graham Platner. The demand also asks for documents showing what policies exist to ensure that editorial standards are applied uniformly regardless of the political affiliation of a story’s subject, according to the demand.
The demand revisits the Times’s Israel coverage, citing its editors’ note on the 2023 al-Ahli hospital report and a 2024 Bar-Ilan University study that identified 72 errors the authors said the paper acknowledged in its war coverage through June 7, 2024.
It also seeks records tied to a May 21 Times Opinion response defending Nicholas Kristof’s earlier column, which included allegations that Israeli forces used dogs to sexually assault Palestinian detainees, claims the demand says were not independently corroborated.
In that follow-up, Opinion editor Kathleen Kingsbury said Kristof’s reporting went through a “rigorous vetting process” and that editors found no errors after reviewing criticism. The shareholder letter, however, cites that episode as one of several it says should have triggered board attention to standards oversight, particularly given the sensitivity of Israel-related reporting and the public backlash that followed.
Platner Reporting Moved the Dispute Forward
A major part of the supplemental demand centers on the Times’s June 4 report on Platner, then a Democratic Senate candidate in Maine. In that article, the Times said several former partners described “unsettling” behavior and reported that ex-girlfriend Lyndsey Fifield had made claims the paper said it “could not corroborate.” The article described Platner as “charming and charismatic” in some accounts, while also reporting that women described him as demeaning, heavy-drinking, and, in one case, physically threatening.
The supplemental demand points to what followed. In a later Mediaite report, Fifield said she had supplied Times reporters with names of friends, former roommates, screenshots, diary entries, and other material she believed supported her account. A Times spokesperson responded to Mediaite by saying the June 4 article included details that were “on the record and confirmable.”
The issue escalated further after Politico reported on July 6 that another former partner, Jenny Racicot, accused Platner of sexual assault. According to the demand letter, Racicot had spoken with Times reporters before the June 4 piece appeared. The demand argues that the contrast between the Times’s earlier framing and the later Politico report is among the reasons the shareholder is now seeking internal records.
The Times later published a public Q&A explaining how it reported the Platner story. In that piece, deputy politics editor Felice Belman said Times reporters spent weeks interviewing women in Platner’s orbit and sought corroboration beyond the core interviews before deciding what to publish.
A Broader Test of Editorial Oversight
The demand also cites the Times’s March coverage of the spouses of two Democratic politicians with sharply different relationships to Israel. In its March 4 article on Corinne Goldman, the Times reported that some social media activity by the wife of Rep. Daniel Goldman was seen as “insensitive or hateful” toward Palestinians and critics of Israel. In its March 6 article on Rama Duwaji, the paper described posts liked by the wife of Zohran Mamdani as supportive of the Palestinian cause after the Hamas-led October 7 attacks.
Those stories are listed in the shareholder demand as part of the broader request for records concerning how standards are applied in politically charged coverage involving Israel.
The dispute has placed renewed scrutiny on how the Times applies its editorial standards in politically sensitive coverage and what role, if any, its board plays in overseeing the systems designed to enforce them.
NYT took 5 SECONDS to report that Israel bombed a hospital killing 500 Gazans, as told to them by HAMAS. As soon as they reported the truth that it was Hamas that ‘accidentally’ bombed their own hospital, the casualty count suddenly went down to about 100 tragic souls.
It took the NYT, however, three and a half MONTHS to ‘verify’ the mass rapes, mutilations and murders of numerous Israeli women, girls and some men. Much of the evidence was filmed by Hamas themselves as psychological torture for the families of victims. But the NYT had to take MONTHS to print the truth so that spoiled, racist, homophonic, gang rape denying, Jew hating brats like Rama Duwaji (Mamdani’s wife) wouldn’t get upset. That the NYT has been anti-Israel and essentially pro-Hamas for decades, IS the story.
“there is no rhetorical counter-strategy that solves what is fundamentally an economic and legal problem. As long as antisemitic transgression is profitable and cost-free, the market will supply it in increasing quantities. The response that actually matters is not a better argument - it is making the transgression costly again. That means advertiser pressure, platform consequences, and where applicable, prosecution. Not because those tools are pleasant or easy, but because they are the only ones that operate on the reward structure rather than the content.": https://elderofziyon.substack.com/p/antisemitism-is-the-new-edginess