Did NYT Label Pahalgam Attackers as 'Terrorists' After Backlash?

New Delhi, May 7 (NationPress) During India's execution of 'Operation Sindoor', a significant editorial shift was noted in the American newspaper The New York Times, which for the first time labeled the individuals responsible for the Pahalgam massacre as 'terrorists' in its headline. This was a clear departure from their previous use of milder terms like 'militants' and 'gunmen'.

The front-page headline on the NYT website proclaimed: 'India Strikes Pakistan Two Weeks After Terrorist Attack in Kashmir', indicating a notable change in editorial stance amidst growing backlash regarding their earlier reporting.

The Pahalgam incident, which took place on April 22, resulted in the deaths of 26 individuals, including 25 Indian tourists and one Nepali national, as they were brutally gunned down in the Baisaran valley of Jammu and Kashmir.

However, despite the change in headline, the NYT continued to employ contentious language in the body of its report, describing the area as 'Indian-administered Kashmir' and 'Indian-controlled side of Kashmir', thereby neglecting to recognize Jammu and Kashmir as a fundamental part of India.

This aspect of the coverage has continued to attract criticism from Indian commentators and diaspora groups, who contend that such terminology aligns with Pakistan's perspective on the region.

In its coverage of India's military response, the paper stated: 'India claimed it had struck Pakistan after gathering evidence pointing towards the clear involvement of Pakistan-based terrorists in last month’s attack on civilians.'

Additionally, it underscored India's assertion that the response was 'measured, responsible, and designed to be non-escalatory', confirming that only 'known terror camps' were targeted during the operation.

The NYT's reference to 'terrorists' in its headline garnered widespread attention, particularly following the backlash it faced for its initial description of the Pahalgam attackers.

Critics previously condemned the NYT for labeling the attackers merely as 'militants' or 'gunmen', arguing that such descriptions significantly downplayed the severity of the incident.

The backlash intensified with a post on social media platform X from the US House Foreign Affairs Committee, which shared a screenshot of the original NYT headline, 'At Least 24 Tourists Gunned Down by Militants in Kashmir', with the word 'militants' crossed out and replaced with 'terrorists' in bold red.

The Committee remarked, 'Hey, @nytimes we fixed it for you. This was a TERRORIST ATTACK plain and simple. Whether it's India or Israel, when it comes to TERRORISM the NYT is removed from reality.'

The portrayal of the Pahalgam attack as merely a 'shooting' has also incited sharp criticism from various sectors of the US government and Indian diplomatic channels, who argue that such terminology drastically underestimates the atrocity's gravity.