A front-page article with the byline of veteran New York Times opinion writer Nicholas Kristof is the latest poisonous example of what I call the NGO “halo effect.”
Headlined “The Silence That Meets the Rape of Palestinians,” the article consists of supposedly eyewitness testimonies provided by security prisoners (suspected or convicted terrorists) mixed with quotes from “reports” or statements from politicized and far from reliable NGOs, as well as a United Nations committee that recycles their accusations.
False accusations from powerful non-governmental organizations that use human rights to demonize Israel have a history of being amplified by allies, including anti-Israel UN officials, academics, politicians, and journalists on major media platforms.
In the 25 years since the UN held an anti-racism conference in Durban, South Africa, that was turned into an antisemitic NGO horror show, this alliance has promoted non-stop blood libels and false accusations of apartheid, genocide, war crimes, and now – “sexual violence.”
As explained by the halo effect, journalists often automatically embrace NGO accusations at face value, and do not bother to verify the evidence, such as it is, presented by the organizations.
Nicholas Kristof at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland. (credit: WORLD ECONOMIC FORUM/WIKIPEDIA)
NGO leaders and activists are typically portrayed as altruistic idealists, and unbiased – attributes which are, in most cases, long gone, as these organizations have become major political actors.
The central group that Kristof quotes calls itself the Euro-Med Human Rights Monitor (EMHRM), whose main officials have numerous links to Hamas.
The NGO spreads a constant stream of heinous blood libels and conspiracy theories, including organ-stealing accusations, as documented by NGO Monitor, as well as other sources. (With a mailing address in Geneva, EMHRM’s donors are largely hidden.)
‘Often critical of Israel’
In Kristof’s piece, this Hamas front is a core source of the accusation that Israel “employs systematic sexual violence” that is “widely practiced as part of an organized state policy.” He then refers, almost parenthetically, to the organization “as often critical of Israel” – a ludicrously misleading description.
The fact that the article under Kristof’s name appeared simultaneously with the publication of a long-awaited 300-page definitive report documenting the systematic use of sexual violence and rape by Hamas in the October 7 atrocities raises another red flag.
Clearly, Hamas and its lobby would have a major interest in diverting attention from these barbaric actions, and the use of mirror imaging – in which Israel is accused of committing precisely the actions of terrorist organizations like Hamas – is a longstanding tactic.
According to a number of sources, including Israel’s Foreign Ministry, the Times received an advanced text of this report and declined to cover it.
In addition to the EMHRM contributions to the article, Kristof cites a number of other NGOs, all known for demonizing Israel with unverifiable or blatantly false claims.
For example, he quotes the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ), (“a respected American organization” – again reflecting the NGO halo effect) which claims to have “surveyed 59 Palestinian journalists who had been released by Israeli authorities after the Oct. 7 attacks.”
CPJ is also known for repeatedly erasing details, often posted by terror organizations themselves, showing that many of these “journalists” are in fact Hamas operatives. Yaacoub Al-Barsh is only one such example from this week (May 10, 2026) – CPJ claimed he was a slain journalist while Hamas memorialized him as one of its “commanders.”
Publications by other “respected” anti-Israel NGOs quoted by Kristof include Save the Children and the Norwegian Refugee Council, which, like CPJ, claim to have conducted surveys among Palestinians allegedly abused by Israel.
These are not “surveys” based on accepted academic methodologies, and the raw data necessary to confirm the validity of their conclusions is not on the record. Instead, they appear to be a compilation of carefully selected and ideologically aligned responses used to validate the desired message.
In addition to these NGO issues, Kristof’s article raises other major questions related to the Palestinians whose accusations he repeats (again, without independent verification), and his claims to have based the “investigation” during what appears to have been an orchestrated visit to the West Bank, where he conducted interviews.
He also includes quotes attributed to former prime minister Ehud Olmert, who immediately stated: “I have no knowledge supporting these claims…Therefore, the positioning of my quote after pages of such allegations misrepresents my views.”
To clarify these issues, an independent professional and credible investigation of the entire affair is urgently needed. And beyond what is becoming the “Kristof” scandal, putting an end to the NGO “halo effect” among journalists, academics, and politicians is long overdue.
The writer is the founder and president of the NGO Monitor research institute.