It has managed to publish biased pieces against Israel in each of its last four biweekly print editions. I discussed two of them here and here.
The previous edition, dated June 6/13, included another piece on Shireen Abu Akleh where it emphasizes that Israel has refused to start a criminal investigation on her death. As we have noted, the IDF is performing an operational investigation into her death; a criminal investigation is only to be done if there is evidence of a criminal act on the part of Israelis. By saying that Israel is refusing a criminal investigation, Time is implying that it is trying to cover up a crime - when in fact it is evidence that there has been no crime at all.
Also in that issue was the Time list of most influential people, the Time 100. I looked up the Time 100 for last year, which would have covered the timeframe of the Abraham Accords, and no one involved in the most historic Middle East peace deal since the Israel-Egyptian treaty was mentioned.
Likewise, in the most recent Time edition, dated June 20/27, there is an article that mentions a historic Middle East story - only to downplay it.
Written by Mat Nashed of Al Jazeera, it tries to diminish the importance of a trade deal between Israel and the UAE:
Israel and the United Arab Emirates deepened ties on Tuesday with a historic free trade agreement—the first of its kind between Israel and an Arab country—at a time of growing criticism of Israel’s treatment of Palestinians. Both Israel and the UAE are touting the major economic benefits that such a deal could bring. But experts tell TIME that it’s too early to assess the economic impact of the free trade agreement and that the main value of the agreement is political in nature.
Here is a free trade agreement between Israel and an Arab country - and instead of discussing why this is clearly a historic event, the entire article tries to detract from it.
That's bias.
Both Israel and the UAE are already predicting annual bilateral trade will reach $10 billion in five years, more than 10 times the figure recorded in 2021...However, experts are skeptical about the $10 billion figure. According to World Bank data, that amount would make the UAE one of Israel’s largest trading partners. A local Gulf expert, who asked TIME not to disclose his name out of fear that he could lose his livelihood for challenging the information of regional governments, says that the prediction is a stretch. “Look, if the governments are the source, then they usually exaggerate.”
Oh, an anonymous "expert" says $10 billion is unlikely - so is $6 billion not worth even talking about?
Despite the headline news, the UAE’s budding ties with Israel remain deeply controversial across much of the Arab world—particularly as tensions between Palestinians and Israelis mount. Three days ago, the UAE foreign ministry condemned what it called Israel’s “extremist settlers” for storming Jerusalem’s al-Aqsa mosque, the third holiest site in Islam.
Tensions between Palestinians and Israelis have been "mounting" for 74 years.
But most of all, here we see the depth of Time's hate of Israel. Only Arab media uses the terminology of Jews "storming Al Aqsa mosque."
No Jews "storm al Aqsa mosque." No Jews even enter Al Aqsa Mosque. Only in recent years have Palestinians started to refer to the entire Temple Mount as "Al Aqsa Mosque" rather than just the silver domed building on the southern side of the Mount, but the actual mosque itself is off limits to Jews. Time is adopting the nomenclature of those who deny any Jewish connection to the Temple Mount, and it doesn't even use the normal formulation of "Haram al-Sharif/Temple Mount," instead implicitly denying any Jewish connection to the site.
Jews walk peacefully around the perimeter of the Temple Mount, they aren't "storming."
Time also emphasizes that the mosque that the Jews don't enter is the "third holiest site in Islam" but somehow doesn't mention that the Temple Mount is the holiest site in Judaism - not second or third.
The print article is worse than the online version - the print article downplays all Israeli relations with the Arab world and claims that the Palestinian issue is a significant roadblock for the Gulf states, when the online article notes that this really isn't true. But both versions include the bias shown above, and together with the print items in the previous three editions at least, it shows that Time's anti-Israel bias is no accident.
It is an editorial decision.
