The Media Accountability Project  

In their coverage of Palestine-Israel, the media will sometimes say that the West Bank is “disputed,” rather than clarifying that the territory is universally recognized as being under belligerent Israeli military occupation.  For example, on July 20, 2023, CityNews broadcasted a radio segment in several Canadian cities stating, “For the first time, Palestinian-Americans can travel in or out of the disputed West Bank and the Gaza Strip via Israel's Ben Gurion International Airport” (italics added). This distinction is not only semantic, but significant in meaning. To make this clear, this essay will first discuss the reasons why the West Bank is so universally understood to be under Israeli military occupation. Following that, we will describe why replacing the word “occupied” with “disputed” in this context unnecessarily obfuscates the realities and misleads Canadian audiences. Continue reading

In their coverage of Gaza, the media are often confused as to the status of Gaza and whether it’s still militarily “occupied” by Israel.  This confusion likely stems from the fact that Israel “disengaged” in 2005, removing its illegal settlements and its soldiers from the territory. This confusion was clear for all to see when, on April 6, 2023, the CBC issued a “correction” stating, “Last night, we made a reference to the Gaza Strip being ‘occupied.’ The territory is not occupied, but rather has its borders controlled by Israel and Egypt.”  This “correction” followed the broadcast on April 5, when the a CBC Radio presenter on the World at Six had accurately described the Gaza Strip as “occupied.”  This “correction” was likely the result of the pulling of strings at the CBC by a pro-Israel media organization.[i]  Failing to properly describe Gaza as “occupied” is misleading, giving the Canadian public the impression that the people in Gaza may have far more agency than they actually do.  It also changes the light by which Israeli actions may be judged, and whether the people of Gaza are a civilian population deserving of the protections of international humanitarian law. Continue reading

In their coverage of Palestine-Israel, the media often blur the distinction between the terms "occupied" and "captured" and falsely suggest that Israel “captured” the West Bank, East Jerusalem and other territory in the 1967 war.  This usage may mislead the reader into thinking that Israel has a strong claim to, or ownership of, these Palestinian territories. Nevertheless, such usage runs directly counter 1) to how international law views the military seizure of territory, 2) to how the international diplomatic community currently views Israel’s presence in the Palestinian territories, and 3) to how both words are understood in plain English.  To illustrate this issue, it is worth noting the influential role of the Associated Press (AP), an international wire service that supplies content to numerous Canadian media outlets, particularly concerning Israel and Palestine. The following line was frequently used in AP articles in the first half of 2023: “Israel captured the West Bank and East Jerusalem in 1967.” Failing to properly describe the current status of these territories under Israeli administration is misleading to the public, and potentially damaging to the eventual resolution of the conflict.  Continue reading