"Why do you emphasize the fact that calls for an end to the “conflict” and illegal occupation can be “interpreted as calls to ethnically cleanse the Middle East of Jews” but do not emphasize the fact that conflict and illegal occupation of Palestinian lands are widely interpreted as the current ethnic cleansing of Palestinians?"
April 26, 2024
To:
Marco Chown Oved, Journalist, Toronto Star
Anne Marie Owens, Editor-in-Chief, Toronto Star
Dear Marco Chown,
I am writing on behalf of Canadians for Justice and Peace in the Middle East to express concern regarding a recent article titled “Toronto Metropolitan University faces lawsuit over alleged antisemitism on campus,” published on April 26 in Toronto Star.
At one point in your article, you write the following:
Pro-Palestinian demonstrators stress that they seek an end to the conflict and the illegal occupation of Palestinian lands. Supporters of Israel counter that these demands get expressed and extended in ways that deny Jewish people a right to a homeland and can be interpreted as calls to ethnically cleanse the Middle East of Jews.
To maintain accepted standards of balance in journalism, the elements of your paragraph comparing pro-Palestine and pro-Israel demands should mirror one another. There are two ways in which your reporting is non-parallel and, thus, imbalanced. You refer to pro-Israel individuals as “supporters of Israel,” yet you refer to the other side as “pro-Palestinian demonstrators” instead of “supporters of Palestine.” To refer to Israel as a state but reduce Palestine to only its people is a double standard. Please refer to these two camps in a parallel manner: Supporters of Palestine and supporters of Israel or pro-Palestinian and pro-Israeli.
You begin your paragraph by stating that pro-Palestinian demonstrators stress an end to the “conflict and the illegal occupation of Palestinian lands.” Further, you state that “supporters of Israel” insist that pro-Palestine demands manifest in denying Jewish people a right to a homeland and can be “interpreted as calls to ethnically cleanse the Middle East of Jews.” Why do you emphasize the fact that calls for an end to the “conflict” and illegal occupation can be “interpreted as calls to ethnically cleanse the Middle East of Jews” but do not emphasize the fact that conflict and illegal occupation of Palestinian lands are widely interpreted as the current ethnic cleansing of Palestinians? Most pro-Palestinian demonstrators stress that Israel’s current military assault on Gaza is a genocide. If the pro-Israel side’s fear of potential ethnic cleansing is worth mentioning to your readers, then the widely-held concern for the current ethnic cleansing of Palestinians should be too.
I would recommend structuring the comparative paragraph as follows:
Supporters of Palestine stress the importance of an end to the illegal occupation of Palestine and Israel’s current military assault on Gaza, which is widely regarded as a genocide and ethnic cleansing of Palestinians. Supporters of Israel counter that these demands get expressed and extended in ways that deny Jewish people a right to a homeland and can be interpreted as calls to ethnically cleanse the Middle East of Jews.
In an article about students feeling threatened by anti-Zionist and anti-war protests, it is especially critical to report on the actual threat of ethnic cleansing of Palestinians as much as the perceived threat of antisemitism.
Sincerely,
Rose Mardikian,
Media Analyst, Canadians for Justice and Peace in the Middle East