To: CBC President & CEO Hubert T. Lacroix
Dear Mr. Lacroix
I was surprised and a bit puzzled to read the remarks concerning Fairness & Accuracy In Reporting (where I am now a contributing writer) in a recent report from the CBC/Radio-Canada Ombudsman. The ombudsman’s report, which deals with the Middle East documentary Peace, Propaganda and the Promised Land, had this to say about FAIR and the use of our research by the film:
I will address the “shocking” factual issue raised in this passage, but first I can’t help but express my puzzlement at the characterization of FAIR as a “militant group,” a “pro-Palestinian” pressure organization whose analyses don’t constitute “independent research.” I distinctly recall that in 2000, as a FAIR media analyst, I was invited by CBC Radio, along with former Canadian ambassador James Bissett and others, to analyze news coverage of the Kosovo War in a post-broadcast panel discussion of Sandra Bartlett and Michael McAuliffe’s prize-winning Kosovo documentary The Road to Racak. Other FAIR spokespeople have appeared on CBC to discuss everything from Rush Limbaugh to media coverage of the Afghanistan War. Evidently the CBC ought to be more careful about screening out the extremist groups it invites on the air to discuss international affairs.
It is also hard to understand why, after trying to cast a cloud of doubt over FAIR as the source of the cited statistic about TV news coverage of the West Bank and Gaza, the ombudsman apparently never attempted to discover whether the statistic was actually accurate or not. Had the ombudsman’s office done so, it might have learned that this fact is easily verifiable.
As the report notes, the statistic came from a November 3, 2000 online FAIR analysis (which I wrote). The analysis stated:
It would have been a simple matter to confirm that all of this is true. If you go to the Nexis news database, you can ascertain the number of stories containing the words “West Bank” or “Gaza” that aired on the three above-named newscasts within the specified dates, by entering the following search string:
When you do so, 99 stories come up. You can then find how many of these stories mentioned that the territories are occupied simply by adding the term “and occup!” to the search string. This brings up all of the stories within these 99 that contain any variation of the word “occupied” (“occupation,” “occupy,” “occupying,” etc.) There are six such stories, two of which are false positives. (One refers to the occupation of Lebanon while the other refers narrowly to contested control of a specific holy site in Nablus.)
Thus, it is a fact that during the first month or so of the Second Intifada, only four out of the 99 stories mentioning the West Bank or Gaza on the three main U.S. evening newscasts reported that the territories are occupied–approximately 4 percent. I find it amusing that even the ombudsman’s office thinks this omission on the part of the U.S. networks is “shocking.” If the ombudsman’s office believes this to be an issue worth pursuing further, it might consider airing a documentary on CBC investigating pro-Israel bias in the news media.