The Media Accountability Project  

"The term “captured” suggests a sense of permanence or legal legitimacy to Israel’s control, which is contrary to the principles of international law. In contrast, “occupied” reflects the ongoing military control of these areas, as consistently described by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) and the UN. Failing to use the correct term misleads readers and undermines the accuracy and integrity of your reporting." Continue reading

"It is irresponsible for CP to exclude Syrian perspectives of concern regarding HTS and Turkey’s warm relationship. Journalistic skepticism should interrogate how Turkey's actions are shaping Syria’s political future and whether such actions genuinely serve the interests of stability and self-determination. By failing to provide this context, CP risks legitimizing a geopolitical strategy that disregards Syrian sovereignty, Kurdish autonomy, and international law." Continue reading

"I am raising this because it is the responsibility of the media to approach such claims with skepticism and independently verify allegations made by Israel, particularly when they are not substantiated by credible evidence. In fact, these claims are often contradicted by statements from Hamas and, as noted by the OHCHR, could not be verified by an independent third party." Continue reading

"Although Trudeau himself has seldom shown any spine in standing up to US foreign policy directives, to the extent that Trump now calls us the 51st state, few of those interested in justice for Palestinians will mourn Freeland’s departure from cabinet." Continue reading

Why is this not enough? Why is Palestinian testimony being treated as secondary?   Continue reading

"As you well know, journalistic integrity and fairness, as outlined by the Canadian Association of Journalists, demand that the responsible party be clearly identified, especially when documenting acts of genocide. I am sure you understand the profound impact headlines have on readers. Why does the article itself assign responsibility to Israel while the headline fails to do so?" Continue reading

"We see our work as vital to the functioning of a healthy democracy, one that treats violations of journalistic ethics and standards as a profound issue deserving of extensive attention. To portray these efforts as being opposed to “free speech” or an effort to “silence” perceived opposition is a distortion that can only be made in ignorance or bad faith — I can only hope it was the former." Continue reading

"The National Post uses the term 'Sharia law' without nuance or explanation which perpetuates Islamophobic tropes that paint Muslim beliefs and practices as inherently suspect." Continue reading

"There is no justification for a “journalist” to write that APR “threatens to destroy all that it touches,” or to blame antisemitism in Canada solely on Muslim immigrants, or to fearmonger about “Islamism,” or misrepresent survey data, or invent fake data, misrepresent police claims, or lie about protest actions, just to name a handful of the violations contained in this article. The Free Press promotes values on its About page, but it appears they were thrown aside in this case. Corrective action is more than necessary to resolve these issues." Continue reading

"Why does CBC repeat Israeli propaganda in the subheading when the article exposes it as baseless? Journalistic accuracy depends on clearly differentiating between assertions and facts. If an assertion has not been independently verified, journalistic integrity demands it be reported as the spokesperson’s opinion or perspective, rather than as an established fact. Given that the article directly debunks this claim, the subheading should unequivocally reflect this skepticism." Continue reading