The Media Accountability Project  

"There have been different interpretations of Jama’s comments with many groups, including Jewish ones, contesting her comments as being antisemitic. However, you assert this in your headline as fact whereas it is way more accurate to describe it as an 'antisemitic controversy' for sparking debate. As such, I insist that you change the headline from 'antisemitic comments' to 'antisemitic controversy' to better reflect the fact that this is a news article." Continue reading

"While the above lines from the readout may amount to implicit or indirect criticism of current actions by the Israeli government, this requires a significant degree of subjective interpretation. Ultimately, nothing in the readout (nor in the quotes from a GAC source) suggests that Joly’s comments were intended to “call out” Israel’s actions, or that she is “pushing” for them to stop. Instead, they appear to be included as an indirect acknowledgement of controversies which she is obliged to reference, the absolute bare minimum that one might expect." Continue reading

"While Cohen argues that the Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs (CIJA) is not representative of Canadian Jews, his decision to exclude mention of Independent Jewish Voices reflects his own myopia around Canadian Jews of different backgrounds, occupations and affiliations, especially those who are committed to social justice and human rights." Continue reading

"Unfortunately, this single reference to amateur footage describes a violent crowd of Palestinians, which frames the gunshots as a form of self-defence. However, all of the surrounding context and other alarming footage is ignored. In fact, there is footage of live rounds being fired into the crowd of civilians (a bullet coming from the direction of the car can be seen striking a civilian near the end of the clip) and the subsequent scene of casualties in a local hospital." Continue reading

"Cohn claims that the phrase, 'From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free' is controversial 'because it speaks for liberation from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea – with no Israel to speak of.' The reality, however, is that Israel is the occupying power, ‘from the river to the sea.’" Continue reading

"You have also failed to provide any balancing perspective on whether Sarah Jama’s comments are antisemitic and have therefore failed in your journalistic mandate to provide diversity in your news reporting.  By comparison, the Globe and Mail, in an article about Jama and her comments published March 14, cited Independent Jewish Voices which supports Jama, as well as Michael Bueckert of Canadians for Justice and Peace in the Middle East, who describes the ruckus as a “smear campaign.”"  Continue reading

"You end your segment with a problematic claim: 'Militias will make a volatile situation even more combustible.' Why is the recent upsurge in violence blamed solely on the militias? In the context of Israel’s 55-year occupation of the West Bank, its regime of apartheid and its new far-right government which encourages settler attacks, it is more evident to believe that the recent surge in violence is a result of Israel’s actions and policies in the West Bank than young Palestinian militants. In fact, there have been near daily raids by invading Israeli forces in the occupied West Bank where Palestinians are indiscriminately killed. It is simply unfair and unbalanced to claim that it is militias who will make the situation 'more combustible.'" Continue reading

"In an article already plagued by unbalanced reporting (read: citing B’nai Brith but no Palestinian groups), I was shocked to read a clear-cut case of plagiarism in the twelfth paragraph of Ferguson’s article. Besides one word, all of this language is plagiarized directly from the Associated Press." Continue reading

"There is a problematic framing of a ‘cycle’ (or “round” in this case) of violence between Israel and Palestinians, in which Palestinian attacks on Israelis lead to Israeli raids in Palestine. ‘More attacks, more raids.’ There is an element of truth to this framing, as the actions of either party has consequences, often triggering a response. However, it is deeply inadequate." Continue reading

"Although the news segment in question is very brief, it is incredibly biased that you fail to mention that the West Bank is militarily occupied by Israel since 1967. In your news segment, you claim that “the militants opened fire on troops near the city of Nablus.” This statement reflects the fact that Israeli soldiers are stationed in the Palestinian city of Nablus as an occupying force. You should also be aware that the UN General Assembly has recently asked the International Criminal Court to determine whether Israel’s occupation of the Palestinian Territories is illegal, given that it has become a de facto annexation. By omitting such important information, you are failing to meet basic journalistic standards." Continue reading