The New York Times has published what may be the most embarrassing headline in its long and storied history of embarrassing headlines. When Ali Khamenei — the Supreme Leader of Iran, state sponsor of terrorism, and the man personally responsible for the deaths of hundreds of American soldiers — was killed in a joint U.S.-Israeli operation, the paper of record swung into action with this gem: “Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Hard-Line Cleric Who Made Iran a Regional Power, Is Dead at 86.”
“Hard-line cleric.” The man who ordered 30,000 of his own people shot in the streets for protesting his radical policies and plungin the economy into a decades long economic depression got “hard-line cleric.” Scott Adams got “made racist comments on his podcast.” You genuinely cannot make this stuff up.
The Washington Post, not to be left out of the national embarrassment sweepstakes, informed readers that Khamenei was “fond of Persian poetry and classic Western novels, especially Victor Hugo’s *Les Misérables*.” A man of culture! Never mind that he spent four decades funding the groups that blew up our soldiers, maintained a standing death sentence on a British novelist, and personally approved the Khobar Towers bombing that killed 19 American airmen. The important thing is that he really connected with Jean Valjean.
Here’s where it gets truly remarkable. Both the Times and the Post — independently, apparently without consulting each other — reached into their thesauruses and landed on the exact same word to describe the Supreme Leader of the Islamic Republic of Iran.
“Avuncular.”
Both papers called him avuncular. Merriam-Webster defines it as “suggestive of an uncle, especially in kindness or geniality.” We have a genuine question for the writers of both obituaries: Did any of your uncles personally approve terrorist bombings? Did your uncle order security forces to open fire on people celebrating in the streets? Did your uncle’s most famous catchphrase happen to be “Death to America, death to Israel”? Because if so, your family reunions sound absolutely wild.
While the Gray Lady was busy describing Khamenei’s “silver beard” and his habit of “affecting an avuncular and magnanimous aloofness,” the rest of the sentient world was writing rather different headlines. The *Economist*: “Ali Khamenei grabbed power and held it, at bloody cost.” *Foreign Policy*: “Death comes to the dictator.” *Time* magazine: “Ali Khamenei, Iran’s supreme leader who built a de facto military dictatorship, killed in U.S.-Israeli strikes.”
And then there was the New York Times. Writing a tribute that read like a Hallmark card for a man whose most famous public statement was a chant calling for the annihilation of two countries.
The Times’s communications team, faced with widespread mockery on social media, fired back at critics by insisting the paper doesn’t “treat lives dishonestly to score points.” This response came from the same organization that just spent four paragraphs on a terrorist’s reading habits before burying the torture and state-sponsored murder somewhere below the fold — right where normal people stop reading.
Senator Tim Sheehy of Montana offered his own alternative headline: “Radical Islamic terrorist who murdered thousands of Americans got what he deserved.” Twenty words. Eight seconds. Not a single reference to anyone’s uncle. Nailed it.
Fox News contributor Joe Concha responded to the Times headline with “I give up.” Megyn Kelly quipped that she was “so glad I’m getting to know him” after reading the obituary’s warmest passages. The Heritage Foundation’s Jason Bedrick offered the most concise media criticism of the year: “The NYT is garbage.”
Meanwhile, back in Iran, the people who actually lived under Khamenei’s “avuncular” leadership poured into the streets in Isfahan, Shiraz, Karaj, and a half-dozen other cities. Footage circulated online of crowds toppling a statue of the Supreme Leader in Dehloran. His security forces — displaying the geniality that apparently reminded two separate American newspapers of a favorite uncle — opened fire on the celebrants.
The Times has been running this playbook for years. The Washington Post did the exact same thing in 2019 when Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi — the ISIS leader who kept sex slaves and leveled Yazidi villages — died in a U.S. raid and got the headline “Austere Religious Scholar at Helm of Islamic State.” They changed it after the internet erupted. They learned absolutely nothing.
Here is what the obituary departments of both the New York Times and the Washington Post apparently cannot get through their collective heads: when the people who actually lived under a man’s rule pour into the streets cheering at the news of his death, that is not the behavior of a population mourning a beloved uncle.
That’s a clue, fellas.