The Media Accountability Project  

"At a minimum, the reporter should indicate that the Israeli settlers were armed, and she should have attempted to obtain and refer to Palestinian accounts of the confrontation - not just relying on what 'the Israeli military has said' - especially since this situation occurred in a Palestinian village."

The piece repeats Israeli claims that Hezbollah has turned Beaufort Castle in Lebanon “into a military stronghold.” No evidence whatsoever is provided for this key assertion. As a result, to simply parrot it is an act not of journalism, but of stenography.

"I am requesting that the Toronto Star and the Associated Press add the specific Palestinian death toll to this article, in order to align with the standards of accuracy, fairness and balance set out in the Canadian Association of Journalists ethics guidelines."

The lack of accountability passage likewise leaves Lebanese political prisoners and the forcibly disappeared in legal limbo as the agreement does not require Israel to disclose their fate nor allow Red Cross visits.

As an exigent Voice, Dave Gordon is speaking about issues directly related to Exigent’s advocacy and Israel’s interests. This breaks a fundamental journalistic standard of impartiality. Publishing his work as news and without a clear disclosure constitutes a violation of the CAJ's guidelines regarding independence. 

"Kindly keep this feedback in future reporting. 'Israel says X' is not journalism, particularly when the claims are issued by the Israeli military and government, whose Prime Minister and former Defence Minister are currently subject to arrest warrants issued by the International Criminal Court."

This violates journalistic standards of balance and impartiality. Given the long history of blatant lies coming out of official Israeli sources we would expect a large degree of skepticism about their “claims”. This bias is also disrespectful to the loss and agony suffered by the Palestinians in Gaza.

While the article claims “some” of Michael Janz's “recent posts” are “misinformation that could be harmful,” there is only one such post whose factual veracity is in question. It is our understanding that the post is inaccurate, but it is Global’s journalistic responsibility to explain why and make clear what is true.

The framework also grants Israel the right to attack with the approval of the Lebanese government if Israel assesses there are “hostile intentions” or a risk of imminent threat approaching them. The agreement as well stipulates that Israel will not be pursued for crimes it has committed in the past or may commit in the future.

It begs the question, could CTV not have found a neutral and credible expert to interview or did they choose Mr. Varner specifically for his known anti-Iran views, which are also Israel’s?