The Media Accountability Project  

Ireland, like Palestine, was once subject to British Imperial rule. The Irish faced starvation, political repression and forced migration during this period. In Palestine, Britain subcontracted its imperial rule to Israeli settlers in 1948. Since then, Israel has continued to ethnically cleans the country through repression, land confiscation, apartheid, and now genocide of the indigenous Palestinian population.

As reported by other news outlets, including in The Toronto Star and CBC News, officials involved in the investigation led by the United Arab Emirates have stated that there is currently no evidence linking the attacker to Iran, and that the official motive remains under investigation:

"The definition of anti-semitism mentioned in the article is the IHRA definition which is highly problematic and contested, even by Jewish groups. This IHRA definition should be referenced with caution even though the Canadian government has adopted it for now. A more acceptable definition is the Jerusalem Declaration which is worth ingesting for future reference."

On September 8, 2026, CJPME sent a letter of complaint to the Associated Press and the Toronto Star regarding factual inaccuracies in an article regarding Israel’s release of Lebanese and Syrian abductees. 

The article originally specified that “the strikes came days after Israel released five Lebanese prisoners as part of a deal between the two countries.”

However, the four released by Israel were two Lebanese nationals, Ali Shour and Hussein Ayash, and two Syrians, Asaad al-Hseika and Wissam Ibrahim al-Samawi. The last abductee, Malek Ghazi, who was abducted by Israel in October 2025 in the Rashaya region, was actually released the day before (Thursday morning).

After CJPME advocacy efforts, the article was updated to specify that the 5 individuals released between Thursday and Friday were Lebanese and Syrian nationals. An editor’s note was issued too: 

However, CJPME notes that the framing is still problematic as the Lebanese and Syrians released were not prisoners under the conventional sense; they were illegally abducted. L’Orient Today reported they were captured and taken hostage by the Israeli forces from southern Lebanon. A more accurate description; therefore, would be abductees or hostages, instead of prisoners. 

We therefore call on Canadian media outlets to review their editorial practices when choosing between terms such as “prisoner,” “detainee,” “hostage,” and “abductee” as the use of each of these terms has different implications. The taking of hostages for instance is illegal under international law and constitutes a war crime. The difference in language also tends to represent a double standard in which Palestinians and Arabs are held “prisoner” by Israel, but Israelis are held as “hostages,” regardless of the context.

"We insist on your reporting being impartial and precise, which is crucial for journalistic work. Having a framing that runs on "Israel says" and "Hamas run" is unfair reporting, especially in the context of a genocidal war in Gaza, where an actor has considerable military and media leverage in its favor on the other."

Important context is missing. The handover of the abductees occurred as Israel continued to abduct more people in southern Lebanon, including three farmers from Halta on September 3, the same day Israel announced the release of the Lebanese-Syrian abductees. We therefore ask that this important context be added.

Let’s not forget this situation is not rooted in crop failure, drought or UN funding reductions. The core of the problem comes from a single source; a cruel Israeli siege. Something your article does not directly mention except when it is alluded to in the second photo and its caption. Nevertheless we appreciate that you are keeping Canadians informed of this terrible situation.

We ask that Burlington Today and the Associated Press apply consistent sourcing treatment to both death tolls, and note the Health Ministry's place within the Hamas-led government only where it bears materially on the story reported.

"The article casts some doubt on the accuracy of reported Gazan casualties and in doing so, contributes to anti-Palestinian racism by dismissing well-established evidence of mass civilian harm as unreliable because the health-ministry was backed terror-group. We feel these points should be clarified in print and would welcome your comments."

When a claim from a party to the conflict has not been checked, it should be reported as that party's claim, and readers should be told if it could not be verified. That is AP's own journalistic standard.