The Media Accountability Project  

"The article does not align with journalistic standards of balance of perspectives and views. Throughout the article, the overwhelming majority of quoted voices are Iranian-Canadians celebrating the attacks, explicitly pro–U.S. and pro–Israel voices, supporters of regime change, and admirers of Donald Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu. There are no voices from Iranian-Canadians who oppose foreign military intervention, anti-war Iranian diaspora members, international law experts questioning the legality of the strikes, human rights advocates concerned about civilian harm, or scholars contextualizing the consequences of regime change wars."

While you mention physical damage to infrastructure in the neighbouring states as a result of Iranian missiles and that “ the targeting of civilians…” reaffirms their right to respond to the Iranian attacks, there is no mention of the 787 Iranian citizens who have been killed, with well over 100 young girls in the school hit by an Israeli airstrike.

If you would like to respond to alerts like this, sign up to become a Media Responder.

"Giddy for war, the Globe and Mail's editorial board explicitly dismisses international law and endorses regime change in Iran through U.S./Israeli military force. We ask that Media responders challenge the Globe and Mail."

Including this information is essential to provide readers with critical context and to avoid reinforcing the longstanding U.S. narrative that Iran is perpetually on the brink of developing nuclear weapons, a claim that has been invoked for decades to manufacture consent for further military aggression.

"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."

The article lacks any reference to the international law context. For example, whether U.S. strikes in June were authorized under international law, whether these attacks violated the UN Charter, and what Iran’s rights are under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, all merit inclusion in the article in order to provide the reader an adequate, balanced understanding of the situation. 

"The article reports that 'at least 7,015 people have been killed' in Iran’s protest crackdown, citing the U.S.-based Human Rights Activists News Agency (HRANA), while acknowledging that the AP has been unable to independently verify the toll. While HRANA’s work may be valuable, the figure is presented in a manner that risks conveying a level of certainty that does not exist."

"It appears that AP is relying on numbers from the Human Rights Activists News Agency (HRANA), a U.S.-based organization that aggregates arrest data through activist networks under conditions of severe information blackouts inside Iran. While HRANA’s work may be valuable, its figures have not been verified by a reliable third-party."

However, the article should have also noted that Iran’s economic crisis did not emerge suddenly. The current economic turmoil has been building since 1979 due to decades of UN, EU and US-led sanctions against Iran. The sanctions have affected nearly every aspect of the Iranian economy with the greatest impact on the middle class. Sanctions on Iran have also frozen Iranian assets and targeted trade, arms sales, and sectors such as energy, finance, aviation, shipping, construction, mining, textiles, automotive and manufacturing.