NYT Criticized for Scaled Response After False Reporting on ‘Emaciated’ Gazan Boy By The Media Line Staff The New York Times is facing scrutiny after issuing a quietly placed correction to its widely shared Gaza famine story, one that critics say reached only a fraction of its audience. The editors’ note, published Tuesday, acknowledged that the […]
World
The Media Line: NYT Criticized for Scaled Response After False Reporting on ‘Emaciated’ Gazan Boy
Audio By Carbonatix
NYT Criticized for Scaled Response After False Reporting on ‘Emaciated’ Gazan Boy
By The Media Line Staff
The New York Times is facing scrutiny after issuing a quietly placed correction to its widely shared Gaza famine story, one that critics say reached only a fraction of its audience. The editors’ note, published Tuesday, acknowledged that the emaciated toddler featured on the front page on the Times last week suffers from serious preexisting medical conditions unrelated to the war, a fact omitted from the original coverage.
The correction was appended to the online article and posted to the Times’ public relations account on X, which has fewer than 90,000 followers. It did not appear on the Times’ main account, followed by over 55 million users. By then, the image and story had already gone viral and been cited globally as emblematic of famine in Gaza.
The correction followed a detailed report by freelance journalist David Collier, who revealed Monday that Mohammed Zakaria al-Mutawaq had been diagnosed in May with cerebral palsy and hypoxemia, likely tied to a genetic disorder. Collier also noted that other images published by major outlets showed Mohammed’s mother and brother appearing well-nourished.
Collier further questioned the oft-repeated claim that Mohammed’s father died while searching for food. He identified the man as Zakaria Ayoub al-Mutawaq, reportedly killed during an Israeli airstrike in Jabalia in October 2024 around the same time Hamas fighters released a video of attacks on Israeli troops in the area.
Despite acknowledging the child’s medical history, the Times maintained that its reporting reflected “the consequences of the war,” insisting the added detail provided “a greater understanding of his situation.”

