Washington Post 'Hit Piece' Backfires?
In attacking Independent Journalists without addressing key claim, do they strengthen critics?
As I’ve been researching the “Rhetorical Immunity” framework1 used by the US, Israel, and India,2 I’ve been watching for confirmations of the reporting of The Electronic Intifada and Max Blumenthal. Blumenthal reports that the New York Times story alleging “dozens” of Hamas rapes is very poorly substantiated.
Supporting Indications
Besides the actual reporting itself, two meta indicators appear to support Blumenthal’s argument:
The New York Times’s podcast — The Daily — appears to have balked at repeating the article’s claims.3 4
The Washington Post’s “hit Piece” appears to have attempted to vaguely conflate Blumenthal and the Electronic Intifada’s work with people who deny that Oct 7 ever happened (claiming it was staged), and Holocaust deniers, but:
failed to address the substance of the claims about the alleged “mass rapes.”
Hit Piece has the Opposite Effect: Strengthening Critics
Like Lady Catherine de Bourgh questioning Elizabeth in Jane Austen’s Pride and Prejudice, their pressure tactics had the opposite effect they were intending.
Just as Elizabeth’s failure to deny she would marry Darcy signaled to him the seriousness of her interest, the Washington post’s failure to rebut Blumenthal’s argument about Jeffrey Gettleman’s allegations of mass rape should (arguably) strengthen, not weaken Blumenthal’s case.
It seems that many people want “Immunity”/Impunity, including Trump.
The US, Israel, and India are not an exhaustive list of countries that use this “Rhetorical Immunity” framework, just the few that I’ve observed.
The author of the Intercept article about the NYTimes, Daniel Boguslaw interview.