A Palestinian author named Mohammed El-Kurd announced a new effort targeting the NY Times today. The goal is two-fold. First, it's to get anti-Israel (pro-Hamas) voices to refuse to contribute to the opinion pages of the Times. And second, it's to get likeminded people to unsubscribe from the paper. The effort has a website called Boycott, Divest, Unsubscribe which spells out the details.

MORE THAN 300 WRITERS, scholars and public figures – including almost 150 past New York Times contributors – have committed to refusing to write for the paper’s Opinion section until our coalition's three demands are met...

Pledging to withhold contributions from NYT Opinion include Rima Hassan, Chelsea Manning, Rashida Tlaib, Gabor Maté, Sally Rooney, Rupi Kaur, Elia Suleiman, Mariam Barghouti, Greta Thunberg, Kiese Laymon, Mohammed El-Kurd, Hannah Einbinder, Plestia Alaqad, Susan Abulhawa, Mona Chalabi, Catherine Lacey, Kaveh Akbar, Noura Erakat, Mosab Abu Toha, Derecka Purnell, aja monet, Nan Goldin, Viet Than Nguyen, Jia Tolentino, Mariame Kaba, Dave Zirin and Omar El Akkad.

As mentioned, the group has demands. First, they want the coverage in the paper to be more slanted in favor of Palestinians, partly by excluding Israeli authors.

 1) The newsroom must conduct a review of anti-Palestinian bias and produce new editorial standards for Palestine coverage. The Times must correct decades of biased, racist reportage on Palestine by reviewing and revising its style guide, methods of sourcing and citation, and its hiring practices. The paper must bar journalists who have served in the Israeli Occupation Forces from reporting on Israel’s wars and end the practice of printing information gathered through embeds with the Israeli military.

Note that everyone in Israel serves in the IDF as a young person. That service is mandatory. So when they demand that journalists who have served in the IDF not be allowed to report on the conflict, they are essentially demanding that no Israeli be allowed to report on the topic for the Times.

2) The newsroom must retract the widely debunked investigation “Screams Without Words.” In 2004 the Times’ public editor acknowledged the paper’s misreporting on alleged but non-existent “weapons of mass destruction” in Iraq, which helped drive the disastrous U.S. invasion. “Screams Without Words,” with its unevidenced claims of “weaponized sexual assault” on October 7th, was just as damaging. Its key researcher was fired for liking openly genocidal social media posts, its key witnesses have been discredited, and its subjects have come forward to deny its claims. The reporting failed to meet the Times’ own factchecking standards.

Finally, they want to dictate the content of the paper's editorial board to demand that Israel be cut off from US arms sales.

3) The Editorial Board must call for a U.S. arms embargo on Israel. Since the editorial board finally backed a ceasefire in January of 2025 — after more than a year of genocide — that position was adopted by a number of lawmakers and finally implemented this October. But Israel has proven that a ceasefire deal is insufficient to stop its destruction of Gaza. Only an arms embargo can deliver a lasting ceasefire. The U.S. must cut off the arms shipments that make Israel’s crimes possible, and the Times editorial board should use its significant influence to call for the end of American weapons transfers to Israel.

So this group would like to see an Israel that is more susceptible to terror attacks from Hamas and Hezbollah. Frankly, I'm sure most of these people want to see Israel cease to exist but they don't say that openly as part of this boycott.

Recommended
Thursday's Final Word Ed Morrissey Is It OK to Speak the Truth Bluntly? David Strom

The website also has a page full of articles critical of the NY Times. They come from a handful of sources, most commonly Electronic Intifada and the Intercept. If you're not familiar with Electronic Intifada, here's how the site NGO Monitor describes their content.

That's just a sample. There's a lot more at the link above, but you can see that EI is a pro-Hamas, pro-violence against Israeli civilians news site. If this new effort is taking most of their complaints about the Times from Electroic Intifada, that should tell you a lot about what this group would like the NY Times to sound like. Not everyone is impressed:

This one made me laugh.

Of course Taylor Lorenz signed. 

They're only boycotting because they don't have power to shut the NY Times down.

If you must go, well...

There are a lot more like this but you get the idea. Not a lot of people seem threatened by this threat. Mostly people are hoping we hear less from this self-selected list of pro-Hamas extremists moving forward.