NYT accuses Israel of attempting to stifle journalism through legal steps over opinion piece

A spokesperson for the NYT alleged that the threat of legal action is part of a well-worn political playbook that aims to undermine independent reporting and stifle journalism.

People walk by The New York Times building in Manhattan, New York City, U.S., September 16, 2025.

(photo credit: Reuters/Kylie Cooper)

ByGOLDIE KATZ

MAY 16, 2026 05:41

Updated: MAY 16, 2026 06:06

The New York Times charged that Israel is trying to weaken independent reporting and limit journalism after the Prime Minister's Office said it would pursue legal steps against the publication on Thursday regarding a disputed opinion column.

The column, authored by Nicholas Kristof, featured claims of serious sexual mistreatment of Palestinian detainees in Israeli facilities and was labeled by the PMO as one of the most severe and misleading falsehoods ever printed about the State of Israel.

The NYT responded to the PMO by supporting Kristof's opinion column and stating that it was thoroughly researched in a message posted on X/Twitter.

A spokesperson for the NYT asserted that the threat of legal action is part of a well-worn political playbook that aims to undermine independent reporting and stifle journalism that does not fit a specific narrative.

Any such legal claim would be without merit, the statement continued.

NYT faced legal threats previously

The NYT drew a parallel between the response to Kristof's column and an event from August 2025 when it ran a misleading image of a young boy alongside a story on claimed starvation in Gaza.

It later emerged that the boy shown in the front-page image had a prior medical issue that caused his poor appearance, and he was not suffering from starvation.

At that time, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said the NYT should be sued during an interview with Fox News' Bill Hemmer. I am actually looking at whether a country can sue the NYT, and I am looking into it right now, because I think it is such a clear defamation, he added.