Witnesses expressed their outrage towards the New York Times for what they perceive as trivializing the violent incident that occurred at Central Synagogue on Friday night. They argue it was an “extremely violent and horrifying incident” inside a place of worship, and that it misrepresents the facts of the event.
Harry Zimmerman shared a lengthy post on Facebook criticizing the newspaper’s coverage of the brutal attack that led to serious injuries for one parishioner and the assault of a security guard.
“I was there,” Zimmerman, 70, who was sitting in the sixth row of the crowded synagogue on Lexington Avenue and East 55th Street, wrote.
He struggled to understand the stark contrast between his firsthand experience and how the New York Times chose to depict the episode. The alleged attacker, Larry Montez, reportedly shouted hateful remarks during the assault and now faces charges of a hate crime.
The Times article referred to the violent events as “interruptions,” which disturbed both visitors and local New Yorkers, Zimmerman pointed out.
“For years, I’ve heard criticisms about the Times being biased against Israel and the Jewish community. Some might debate that point, but I didn’t need anyone else’s perspective this time. I saw it myself,” he asserted.
Zimmerman described how the malicious incident violently interrupted a Sabbath service attended by hundreds, and he felt it was hard to reconcile the Times’ portrayal of the attack with the reality he witnessed.
The Times characterized Montez as “agitated” and “struggling” while he assaulted 63-year-old Michele Annenberg Poma. Meanwhile, Zimmerman claimed to see a completely different story unfold, describing Montez as “suddenly screaming” and moving aggressively down the aisle while worshippers were just inches away.
He insisted that the attack happened swiftly and without any kind of struggle, emphasizing that the security personnel hadn’t yet acted to restrain Montez before he targeted Poma, ultimately hitting her with full force.
In contrast to the Times’ mention of Montez “knocking over a set of menorahs,” Zimmerman contended that the report downplayed the incident, failing to capture its true nature. He recalled seeing Montez deliberately destroy the menorahs, likening it to historical acts of desecration.
Frustrated congregants voiced their dissatisfaction with the misleading language used by the Times. One stated, “The description of a ‘disturbance’ doesn’t reflect the gravity of what actually occurred in our sanctuary during Shabbat services,” suggesting that the true story was lost in translation.
Zimmerman urged for responsibility in media reporting, particularly when it comes to acts of violence. He posted alongside the Times article, encouraging readers to form their own opinions.
He reflected on how he had often questioned discussions surrounding the Times’ portrayal of Jewish issues. “But now, having witnessed it directly, I will no longer doubt the concerns raised,” he shared.
Zimmerman emphasized that journalists bear responsibility for their influence, criticizing the Times for its diluted reporting.
“It’s crucial to use precise language when discussing violence in religious settings, especially when it may be motivated by hate,” he remarked.
Support for Zimmerman’s stance poured into his Facebook comments, with one user thanking those who highlighted the inadequacies in the Times’ reporting.
In the aftermath, the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office charged Montez with multiple counts related to hate crime assault and harassment, including accusations of calling Jews derogatory names.
A representative from the Times defended their coverage, stating that the article conveyed the facts regarding an event that threatened worshippers and disrupted religious gatherings. They insisted that the report accurately reflected the violent nature of the attack.
