The Jerusalem Post apologized to Norway for its editorial on the late July attack. (Credit: JPost, screenshot)

The Jerusalem Post apologized to Norway for a July 24 editorial (see here) following the attacks in Oslo.

The Post’s apology came ina full-page editorial, according to the Guardian. The Aug. 4 apology editorial requests that the “Norwegian government and people will accept that ‘Post’s apology and forgive us for any offense or hurt caused at this sensitive time.”

The editorial notes that the newspaper received “an avalanche” of negative responses to the editorial, which the Post described as having “inappropriately raised issues that are not directly pertinent, such as the dangers of multiculturalism, European immigration policies, and even the Oslo peace process.”

The editorial noted that the Post’s editor-in-chief had also issued a statement condemning violence.

But the Jerusalem Post isn’t the only outlet to have stepped back from its original reporting on the Norway attacks.  The Atlantic Wire collected other media errors in reporting on the Norway attacks.

For example, the UK Sun headlined its front-page story on the attack: “‘Al-Qaeda’ Massacre: Norway’s 9/11,” according to Sky News. Atlantic Wire also pointed to the Washington Post, which has been criticized for its blogger Jennifer Rubin’s post commenting that “there is a specific jihadist connection” in the attacks.

The Washington Post’s ombudsman, Patrick Pexton, weighed in on the criticism of Rubin’s post in a July 29 column.  Pexton commented that Rubin jumped to the conclusion that it was “an al-Qaeda operation” and then used that claim to argue U.S. policies, like maintaining “defense or homeland security funding.”

Pexton commented that Rubin’s inaccurate statement about this being an al-Qaeda attack stayed online “uncorrected for more than 24 hours” and that no editor added an update or correction to her post.  He explained that Rubin didn’t either because she was offline as the confirmation that the attack “had no connection to international terrorism or Muslims” came in around the time she went off-line in order to follow the Sabbath.

She did run a corrective, apologetic post, Pexton noted.  However that post also drew ire as she made a comment Pexton said readers described as “borderline racist.”

Pexton excused her posts and their “tone,” however, because “this is what she does and who she is.”

iMediaEthics has written to the Jerusalem Post asking what prompted its apology and will update with any response.