The Media Accountability Project  

We always see in the media opposition to Zionism being conflated with antisemitism, and we therefore thank you for giving space for Elsayed to debunk these claims.

"The use of language like 'firebombing of Jewish schools' to describe small arson attacks versus 'bombard the Gaza Strip'—when Israel is widely considered to be committing a genocide in which mass killings, the targeted killing of children, deliberate starvation, infliction of serious bodily and mental harm, and prevention of births have all been documented—exemplifies a bias in your reporting."

"Nous insistons à ce que vous précisez les origines et les biais derrière des études menées par de tels organismes, dont les versions opposées à celles-ci dans vos articles. En tant que l'un des plus importants médias et journaux francophones lus au Québec, cela est important et relève du travail de journalisme de qualité et de précision que de préciser."

"The claim that Dr. Moss left Montreal due to rising antisemitism in the city contradicts a report published yesterday by Mr. Derfel on the same story. In yesterday’s article, Mr. Derfel stated that he reached Dr. Moss by phone, but that the surgeon declined to give an interview or to explain his reasons for leaving Montreal. The rest of Mr. Derfel's article relies almost entirely on anonymous sources allegedly close to Dr. Moss, and speculating that he may have left due to antisemitism."

"Mr. Derfel describes the anonymous sources vaguely as 'sources close to Moss' and 'a source.' This description is vague or whether the sources have any personal, political, or institutional biases that might influence how they frame Dr. Moss's departure. As it stands, given the breaches of CAJ standards due to the use and framing of anonymous sources, this article does not meet the threshold of serious journalism."

While the columnist is entitled to their own opinion, when that opinion steps into the realm of dangerously conflating criticism of Israel and advocacy for Palestinian human rights with antisemitism, while relying on statistics grounded in flawed methodology, it becomes an inflammatory attempt to weaponize the very real fight against antisemitism in order to silence any advocacy for Palestine under the guise of fair commentary.

Instead of presenting the substantive concerns of Canadians and Canadian civil society organizations about CANSEC - that it welcomes international delegations, many of them governments, with well-documented records of human rights violations, and that among the 300+ companies invited to this event are those that contribute to war crimes and crimes against humanity in Palestine, Lebanon, Iran, Yemen, Sudan, and beyond - this article unfairly frames opposition to CANSEC as a mere nuisance and traffic disturbance. 

"This prioritization of information is dramatically different from the April 21, 2026 Canadian Press article on the same topic, where October 2023 and the broader geopolitical context is mentioned in the fourth and fifth paragraph - of a total of 26 paragraphs."

Conflating a pro-Palestinian protest chant with antisemitism is neither fair nor accurate; it rests on an exaggerated interpretation presented as fact. This is not fair or balanced journalism.