The Media Accountability Project  

"To put it simply, B’nai Brith deliberately conflates incidents of antisemitic speech and violence with pro-Palestinian activism and criticism of Israeli policies. Right at the top of the cover page, the report includes an image of pro-Palestinian demonstrators urging a boycott of Israeli wine and places it directly next to antisemitic and white supremacist content."

The use of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s (IHRA) definition of antisemitism is unchallenged despite its attempt to conflate criticism of Israel’s apartheid policies with antisemitism and silence human rights organizations and pro-Palestinian activists.

On March 8, 2023, Saltwire published a letter to the editor by Frank Holden in support of bus advertisements in St. John’s which pointed to human rights reports on Israeli apartheid. The letter discussed the Palestinian indigenous connection to the land and the dispossession Palestinians have experienced through settler colonialism. However, the letter was published with the false and misleading headline, "Anti-semitic advertisements back on Metrobus," which reflected the exact opposite of the points made in the letter.

CJPME wrote to Saltwire to request a headline change, and after receiving no response, submitted a complaint to the National NewsMedia Council. On April 6, 2023, CJPME was informed that the NCC had discussed the matter with Saltwire, which had made an editorial decision to change the title to "LETTER: Bus adverts a reminder to be concerned for safety and equality of all," which better reflects the contents of the letter.

The headline chosen by Saltwire is misleading and reflects the precise opposite of the points made in the letter. A more accurate headline would be “Anti-apartheid advertisements appear on Metrobus,” or “Advertisements in support of Palestinian self-determination appear on Metrobus."

On February 6, 2023, the Richmond News published an article about an upcoming vote at Richmond City Hall on the controversial IHRA definition of antisemitism, which conflates antisemitism with criticism of Israel.

However, CJPME felt that the article did not adequately express the broad opposition to IHRA in Canadian civil society, and requested that the article name some of the organizations which are critical of IHRA, including the BC Civil Liberties Association (BCCLA). CJPME also requested that the article specify that the threat of IHRA was not hypothetical, and that there were documented cases of it being used to silence speech.

These issues were largely addressed in a subsequent article on the topic, published on February 10, 2023, which included the following discussion:

In response to a Richmond News article on council considering the definitions of anti-racism, a spokesperson of the Canadians for Justice and Peace in the Middle East, Reem Majid, said she felt the opposition to the IHRA definition was broader than just being opposed by one Jewish group, Independent Jewish Voices, mentioned in a previous News article.

This definition has, in fact, been opposed by other Jewish groups, some labour groups as well as the BC Civil Liberties Association (BCCLA).

The BCCLA warned Vancouver city council, when they were considering adopting the IHRA definition of anti-Semitism, that it was “extremely vague” and “open to misinterpretation” and would “serve to severely chill political expressions of criticism of Israel as well as support for Palestinian rights.”

Some universities and other organization have documented cases where they claim the IHRA definition caused free speech, namely, criticism of Israel, to be stifled.

"The article sheds light on the controversial International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of antisemitism which is being proposed as part of a larger anti-racism motion to city council. We thank you for mentioning the U.N. report which criticizes IHRA, and for briefly noting some of the key concerns. However, I would like to point out a number of areas where this discussion could be strengthened.

First, you write that “some groups, including one Jewish group, claim it could curtail criticism of Israel and Zionism.” This sentence fails to capture the strong opposition by many Canadian civil society groups against the adoption of IHRA. If your article mentioned some of these prominent and respected organizations, it would be clear to the reader that the opposition to IHRA is widespread and based on serious concerns."