"While the credentials of the guest were supposed to suffice in presenting a balanced view of a ceasefire between Hamas and Israel, the interview ended up being one-sided and inaccurate."
August 20, 2024
To:
Renee Rodgers, News Anchor, CTV National News
Rosa Hwang, Executive Producer, CTV National News
Dear Renee Rodgers, and Rosa Hwang,
I’m writing to you on behalf of Canadians for Justice and Peace in the Middle East (CJPME, https://www.cjpme.org) to express our concerns regarding the August 18 CTV News at 5h30 EST segment with Renee Rodgers: “Ceasefire deal terms are ‛crucial’: analyst,” published on CTV News. For the reasons we will give below, we request a right of reply.
This news segment is an interview with University of Toronto International Relations Professor Aurel Braun.
While the credentials of the guest were supposed to suffice in presenting a balanced view of a ceasefire between Hamas and Israel, the interview ended up being one-sided and inaccurate.
Braun says multiple false statements that needed to be challenged by the host but weren't, such as these ones:
-"The problem is, that there was a ceasefire on Oct. 6, which Hamas broke, and Hamas has disregarded almost every ceasefire that they engaged in."
-"The Rafah crossing, which was supposed to have been guarded, in fact, was a location where a flood of weapons came in from Iran."
There was no formal ceasefire on Oct. 6. As is explained in Mehdi Hasan’s ‛debunked’ video, this is just a pro-Israel talking point that has been repeated by officials, such as Netanyahu and Clinton. It is simply false and surprising that a university professor, using his credentials on air, would perpetuate such a falsehood. If one looks back to the weeks prior to October 7, one would discover that Israel attacked Gaza numerous times. On October 4, Gaza protesters were shot at with bullet wounds to their ankles. In the West Bank, Israel had already killed 234 Palestinians prior to Oct. 7. How Can Braun claim there was a ceasefire if the Israeli army acted like none was in place prior to Oct. 7? Indeed, there was no formal ceasefire in place in the lead-up to October 7, and if anything, Israel had broken whatever informal one existed.
Hamas did not disregard almost every ceasefire that they engaged in. On the contrary, this logic applies more to Israel. According to an infographic by visualizing Palestine that analyzed violations of ceasefire since Israel and Palestinian factions in Gaza entered into a ceasefire brokered by Egypt from November 2012 until July 2014, "Israeli violations were more frequent and far more deadly. Out of Israel’s 191 violations, 10% resulted in death and 42% in injuries or detentions; while out of the 75 Palestinian violations, just 4% resulted in injuries and none in death."
Braun claims that the Rafah crossing is the location "where a flood of weapons came in from Iran." However, Braun provides no evidence to back this claim. This is a concerning statement to make as Rafah has been repeatedly bombed and is the main access to get aid into Gaza.
When discussing if there is any flexibility for the ceasefire, Braun talks about strategic goals but focuses solely on Israel’s side. He mentions the Israeli hostages, not allowing Hamas to reconstitute itself and govern Gaza, Hamas being a "catastrophe" for Israel, but a "disaster" for the Palestinian people. Braun also only asked what a ceasefire would mean for Netanyahu while completely leaving out what it would mean for Palestinians. If the interview was truly balanced, it would have included a Palestinian perspective.
The above information should make abundantly clear that either a right of reply or on-air corrections are necessary.
I, therefore, formally ask you to issue on-air corrections or allow us to have a right of reply. Staff members at my organization, CJPME, have spoken to CTV News before and would be glad to do so in this case.
Sincerely,
Fatima Haidar
Media Analyst, Canadians for Justice and Peace in the Middle East