The Media Accountability Project  

"The article reports that Canada was not involved in any operations and had no advance notification of the U.S. strikes. However, publicly available reporting from CBC News indicates that up to 18 Canadian Forces members were deployed on exchange with U.S. units in Bahrain and Qatar at the time of the strikes. Former senior Canadian general Denis Thompson stated that, absent explicit restrictions from Ottawa, it is highly likely that Canadian officers embedded with U.S. forces would have been involved at some level in planning or coordination."

It is also important to point out that for Palestinians there is no “ceasefire”. This is part of the complacency that Mr. Khan speaks of and which the article feeds into somewhat by focussing on a mental health program while de-emphasizing the widespread carnage and the destruction of so much of Gaza's infrastructure.

"In dealing with complex and charged issues such as the Israeli apartheid and now genocide, journalistic standards require special attention be paid to use of language, context, and a clear account of historical events."

"There is no input from the artists themselves or from supporters who may defend their right to freedom of expression."

"In the name of fair and accurate journalism, I believe this context should have been included in the article, as it’s crucial for readers to understand what truly happened on October 7, including the fact that Israel’s own military directives led to the deaths of its own civilians."

"Midway through the piece there is this passage, “Hamas militants attacked Israel, resulting in the deadliest massacre of Jews since the Holocaust.” This point is only half the story. You should also be informing your readers “since October 8th, Israel has massacred more Palestinians than since the beginning of recorded time”.  Fair is fair."

"Second, referring to Israel’s presence in the occupied West Bank as “disputed” is factually incorrect, legally unfounded, and undermines Palestinians' legitimate indigenous claim to their land. All settlements and outposts are considered illegal under international law based on the Fourth Geneva Convention which specifies that the transfer of an occupier’s population into the territory it occupies is prohibited. To maintain journalistic accuracy, I urge you to describe Israel’s presence in the West Bank as 'occupied' rather than 'disputed.'"

It is unusual to read such a thorough account of a Palestinian perspective in Canadian media. That said, this article helps balance a media environment that rarely platforms Palestinians, except when covering their suffering.

"There are several issues in your article. First, you do not provide a description of B’nai Brith. B'nai Brith Canada is a self-professed staunch defender of the State of Israel and a pro-Israel advocacy organization. Not providing information about B’nai Brith is misleading and unfair as their pro-Israel stances are often conflated with antisemitism."

"While it is true that Intifadas in Palestine have included violent events, they are fundamentally about resisting oppression. The resistance has been mixed, involving both violent and non-violent methods. To frame calls for an intifada as inherently violent is a gross misrepresentation and does a disservice to your readers."