Why not a retraction? Do newspapers do that anymore or just put oops my bad statements ?
The fact that anyone on earth is splitting hairs about this shows you how desperately messed up everything is.
There is absolutely no moral victory whatsoever in defining down starvation, but that is what is happening, ultimately, whether in this story or in any others.
At a time when most of the world is critizing Israel's food distribution program in Gaza (who its at war with), correctly stating the child is diseased and not simply suffering malnutrition is relevant.
Unrelated
I live in NYC, Occasionally walking around with my dad (doctor), well see someone who is skin and bone.
My impulse is the person has anorexia, he says no, that person has late stage X disease. Just incorrect to think the woman has anorexia due to a mental disorder when she has organ failjre happening due to something else.
Unusual for the NYT to show this much spine but perhaps their bravery reflects a growing unease in the chattering around the US administration about their own policy choices that have emerged out of what people charitably assumed was Trump's dark satirical trolling about turning Gaza into a riviera to try to provoke capitulation.
What has gone on here -- and the low key "they aren't starving, this is just the long term consequences of not getting enough food" talking point sleight of hand -- feels like the origin story of some future event that will bring about the end of the western world. We have not even the pretence of morality here.