The Media Accountability Project  

It is clear that Bercuson’s piece is irredeemably flawed and its publication incompatible with a newspaper’s obligation to the truth. It is therefore essential that the National Post retract it and commit to fact checking any future items on this topic. Continue reading

Israel’s blockade of Gaza is illegal under international law but AP did not say this once in the article. Why? Continue reading

It is unfortunate, however, that you cite Israel’s rejection of the figures without specifying that it has produced no actual evidence to the contrary or alternative data. It would also be relevant to note that, regardless of what Israel may say publicly, its military accepted the accuracy of the death tolls given by Gaza’s Ministry of Health in early 2026, calling it “broadly accurate.” This view is reflected by Israeli intelligence agencies as well. Continue reading

While Israel routinely claims that it only targets infrastructure linked to the resistance in Lebanon, there have been repeated attacks on civilian infrastructure and civilians themselves. Yet the article glaringly omits this perspective and instead uncritically repeats Israeli military claims. Continue reading

Viewers were presented with Israeli government officials, and Israeli opposition figures, but no critical voices against the law itself. Continue reading

We have serious concerns regarding the evidence relied upon in the report, as well as controversy surrounding the founder of the non-profit organization, Cochav Elkayam-Levy, raising significant questions about the credibility of the commission’s findings. These concerns should warrant fair-minded journalistic scrutiny by The Globe and Mail, which is presently missing. Continue reading

Describing Iran as Hezbollah’s “masters” strips Lebanese actors of political agency. The term masters is at best a provocative term, and at worst its flatour incendiary. In either case, its usage constitutes a strong expression of slanted personal opinion. The purpose of analysis articles, according to the JSP, is to offer readers insights “based on facts.” We believe this framing sacrifices the intent of analysis in favor of polarizing sensationalism. Continue reading

The issue with the article is that it does not provide space to challenge or raise skepticism around Israel’s claim that the IDF only targets buildings used by the resistance in Lebanon. Continue reading

Ce rappel est d'autant plus crucial en ce moment, alors que l'attention des médias internationaux s'est détournée de l'enclave pour se porter sur d'autres conflits dans la région, notamment en Iran et au Liban. Continue reading

This raises an important editorial question: what objective standard determines when a state is described as a “government” versus a “regime”? If the distinction is not applied consistently across states regardless of alliance or geopolitical positioning, then the terminology ceases to function as responsible reporting and instead becomes selective language that falls outside the realm of fair journalistic practice. Continue reading