The Media Accountability Project  

"This was no act of God that killed these six people. People don’t die from the cold unless they are not provided adequate shelter. These Palestinians used to have homes. The UN estimates that Israel has damaged or destroyed 92 percent of all residential buildings in Gaza since October 2023."

I urge the Western Standard to revisit the framing of this article and to ensure that future reporting does not misconstrue basic equity and inclusion practices as suspicious, nor stigmatize employees for their identity, their community advocacy, or their efforts to address systemic inequities in the workplace. This is not responsible journalism. It is fear-mongering.

On December 8^th, 2025, one of our media advocates responded to an article written by the Western Standard titled: “RCMP employee linked to Palestinian activist network raises questions over political influence.”

Our main issue was with the framing of the article. Rather than reporting on legitimate workplace inclusion efforts, the piece manufactures suspicion around a Muslim RCMP employee for participating in an internal volunteer network - a network that allegedly supports Muslim staff, identifies anti-Palestinian racism, and promotes balanced representation of Palestinian perspectives.

These are standard equity and diversity practices across the federal public service; yet we argued that the article presents them as politically threatening by suggesting there is “scrutiny over political advocacy within Canada’s national police force.”

According to the Arab-Canadian Lawyers Association (ACLA), anti-Palestinian racism includes conduct that “silences, excludes, erases, stereotypes, defames or dehumanizes Palestinians or their narratives.” By portraying basic inclusion work and calls for fair representation of Palestinians and religious minorities as warning signs of “political influence,” the article contributes to the silencing and stigmatization of Palestinian and Muslim employees. In doing so, we argued that the piece participates not only in Islamophobia but also in anti-Palestinian racism. This is not responsible journalism. It is fear-mongering.

The complaint was published as a letter to the editor here. 

"This framing is deeply harmful. It implicitly casts Palestinian protests as threats to public order, reinforcing stereotypes that depict Palestinians and their allies as disruptive, extremist, or violent. Such narratives contribute directly to anti-Palestinian racism by portraying advocacy for Palestinian rights as inherently problematic or unsafe."

Joe Warmington wrote an inflammatory opinion piece in the Toronto Sun accusing a pro-Palestinian supporter of bringing a grenade to the Walk with Israel —when in fact, the object was obviously nothing more than a keychain. This kind of racist misinformation fuels anti-Palestinian hate and should never have been given a platform in Canadian media.

Unfortunately, mainstream media outlets in Canada have a history of being reluctant to use the word "Palestine." Some never use the word at all, opting instead to only talk about “Palestinians” while erasing their connection to their land, using phrases like “lands Israel occupied” or even referring to Palestinian land as “modern-day Israel.”

"The article effectively highlighted the troubling double standard: why are symbols like the Pride flag and the Star of David permitted, while a simple watermelon pin—widely recognized as a symbol of Palestinian identity and resistance—is not allowed?"

"Malcolm X pointed out that law enforcement often serves to uphold the status quo and protect systems of power, rather than ensuring true safety and justice for individuals, especially those from marginalized communities. This reflection on institutional racism remains sadly relevant today, and your article courageously provided Bahnan with the platform to address the systemic issues surrounding police and to challenge the dangerous naivety in assuming that the police are always there to serve and protect, particularly marginalized communities."

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

"The definition has been interpreted to label even the slogan “Free Palestine” as antisemitic, setting a deeply troubling precedent that suppresses pro-Palestinian activism. Including this context is essential for readers to critically assess the claims made in your article – and its omission risks Bradford Today endorsing a flawed and highly politicized interpretation of antisemitism."