The Media Accountability Project  

Inaccurate phrasing used during July 27 World Report

While the segment otherwise refers to the Occupied Palestinian Territories, it is both unusual and unfortunate that CBC would employ the fraught phrase “disputed territory” in reference to Palestinian land illegally occupied by Israel. These lands are recognized as illegally occupied under international law and by the Canadian government — a position reaffirmed by the International Court of Justice in 2024.

I am writing on behalf of Canadians for Justice and Peace in the Middle East (CJPME) regarding a recent segment aired during the July 27, 2026 episode of World Report.

Specifically, I am concerned about the following sentence: “[Netanyahu’s] government opposes Palestinian statehood and has expedited Israeli settlements in the disputed territory, a move seen as illegal under international law.”

While the segment otherwise refers to the Occupied Palestinian Territories, it is both unusual and unfortunate that CBC would employ the fraught phrase “disputed territory” in reference to Palestinian land illegally occupied by Israel. These lands are recognized as illegally occupied under international law and by the Canadian government — a position reaffirmed by the International Court of Justice in 2024. Additionally, the Palestine Institute for Public Diplomacy’s Communicating Palestine initiative published a “Terminology Guide” for journalists specifically warning against using “disputed territory.” 

It is inaccurate to describe Palestinian land as “disputed.” 

If ever it was journalistically important to mention Israel’s illegal and inaccurate position that the territory is “disputed,” such a circumstance demands significant qualification and context, which is not provided here — there also seems to be no good reason the “disputed territory” is used in this case, as it adds nothing to the segment other than an inaccurate portrayal of the status of the Occupied Palestinian Territories. To be sure, mention of international law at the end of the sentence in question does not resolve the inaccuracy, as it was in reference to the “move” to “expedite Israeli settlements,” not in reference to the status of the land.

I am urging CBC News to issue an on-air correction during an upcoming broadcast of World Report and to ensure that the internal language guide discourages reporters from using this phrase when describing Palestine.

Sincerely,

image.png

Jason Toney

Director of Media Advocacy, CJPME

On July 31, after our initial arguments were rejected, we followed up with this letter:

 

To add to my existing argument, "Disputed territory" was stated as an objective fact, despite being an inaccurate description by most reasonable metrics. There is no qualification directly given to the phrase "disputed territory," so it isn't clear to the reader that it is a loaded and heavily contested term. To be sure, the phrase "disputed territory" is the preferred terminology of the state of Israel. It is not the language used by virtually the entire international community, nor by human rights organizations or international courts, and it should not be used by media outlets. It suggests there is an open legal debate where there is not. It is not as if the earlier mentions of "occupation" specified that this was a well-established legal designation — as in, it is reasonable that someone could infer the West Bank's status is not a settled matter.
Further, international law was cited subjectively specifically in relation to settlements: "a move seen as illegal under international law." It is not "seen as" illegal under international law. It is illegal under international law, as affirmed by the courts (both in ICJ's 2004 advisory opinion and 2024 ruling). As such, the way in which international law was referenced again suggests there is some kind of open debate where there is none in the context of international law.
 
Again, it seems reasonable that an ordinary listener could assume that "disputed territory" is basically a synonym for occupation, and that the issue of occupation or settlements remains an open one in the eyes of international law. None of that is the case.
Apologies for repeating myself, but I want to make sure my points are understood. For all of these reasons, and my earlier arguments, I'd again ask for CBC to consider airing a correction. If that is not possible, I'd respectfully request an Ombuds Review of whether CBC's use of the phrase "disputed territory" in this broadcast violates the standard of accuracy (or other relevant aspects of the JSP).
Jason

The Media Accountability Project is an initiative of:
Canadians for Justice and Peace in the Middle East (CJPME), 580 Sainte-Croix, Suite 060, Saint-Laurent, QC H4L 3X5
©2007-2023 CJPME

CJPME acknowledges that our offices, located in Montreal, are on the unceded, unsurrendered Territory of the Kanienʼkehá꞉ka (Mohawk), whose presence here reaches back to time immemorial.  CJPME recognizes the Kanienʼkehá꞉ka as the customary keepers and defenders of the St. Laurence River Watershed and its tributaries. We honour their long history of welcoming many Nations to this beautiful territory and uphold and uplift the voice and values of our Host Nation.  Further, CJPME respects and affirms the inherent and Treaty Rights of all Indigenous Peoples across this land. CJPME has and will continue to honour the commitments to self-determination and sovereignty we have made to Indigenous Nations and Peoples.  CJPME also acknowledges the historical oppression of lands, cultures and the original Peoples in what we now know as Canada and fervently believes that its work should contribute to the healing and decolonizing journey we all share together.

Created with NationBuilder