Speaking of biased reporting

This again?

For the unfamiliar, “Confrontation at Concordia” was a “documentary” created by “journalist” Martin Himel after the Sept. 9, 2002 riot at Concordia University which stopped a planned speech there by former Israeli Prime Minsiter Benjamin Netanyahu.

I put words in quotes because the Global TV special was insanely biased in favour of one side of the conflict (namely, the right-wing, pro-Netanyahu, anti-Palestinian side). It was so bad the matter was taken up with the Canadian Broadcast Standards Council. Its decision (which I reported on) said in part:

The Panel recognizes that the documentary film at issue was not detached and objective in a journalistic sense; however, the Panel is not of the view that its broadcast was in breach of any of the foregoing provisions of the either the CAB Code of Ethics or the RTNDA Code of (Journalistic) Ethics. That being said, the Panel considers that it would have been helpful to the audience to inform viewers that the broadcast was a point-of-view documentary.

The council made the point that since it was a documentary, not a news piece, it didn’t have to be objective. I disagree, but c’est la vie. Now because of this, people think Concordia’s Muslim groups are funded by the Saudi government.

As far as documentary coverage of that era of Concordia history, I recommend the far more balanced documentary Discordia.

One thought on “Speaking of biased reporting

  1. autone

    “namely, the right-wing, pro-Netanyahu, anti-Palestinian side”
    So you – like most nutroots believe that free speech should only be available to the side you agree with.
    Another misguided Canadian…..

    Reply

Leave a Reply