CanWest: Don't vilify Muslims
By Mazen Chouaib

The Globe and Mail - Comments - September 22, 2004

When the late Israel Asper's CanWest Global Communications acquired a significant share of the Canadian media, many of us feared the worst - particularly on the issue of Middle East coverage. In the past week, CanWest's editorial practices have shown we were right to worry.

Recent news reports have highlighted CanWest publications' use of emotive qualifiers in wire news stories pertaining to Iraq and the Arab-Israeli conflict. Editors at the National Post and The Ottawa Citizen have been instructed to change the word "militant" to "terrorist" in Reuters copy. This editing standard, however, is generally not being used when referring to other conflict areas.

Reuters is rightly upset, saying this practice undermines the news agency's objective reporting. It also raises the question of whether the time has come for a dispassionate debate on the impact of media concentration in this country.

For many Arab Canadians, this is another example of what they have long complained about: CanWest seems to make every effort to demonize them and their culture. There have been many complaints by Arab groups against CanWest, but the organization maintains an uncompromising and unapologetic position.

CanWest says its definition of a terrorist is based on the inclusion of certain militant groups on the Canadian government's official list of terrorist organizations. In principle, this is a legitimate claim. But CanWest's publications generally aren't applying the same principle to non-Arab groups. Furthermore, the Post and the Citizen refer to the Palestinian territories as "disputed territories," contrary to international conventions and Canada's foreign policy principles. Even Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon says the territories are "occupied."

True to form, CanWest went on the offensive this week, producing an eerie reminder of George W. Bush's "with us or against us" war-on-terror logic. "Osama bin Laden would have us believe that one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter. Nonsense," said the Citizen.

According to the Post, terrorism "means deliberate, premeditated violence perpetrated against non-combatants with the aim of advancing a political goal." Though this definition is fine, Israel equates any attack on its occupation forces as an attack on innocent civilians inside Israel. So too does the Post.

Violence is abhorrent. We will never condone it, but we can understand its motivations and attempt to remedy an injustice. Israel is an occupier, not a visitor. It is not an innocent bystander.

But the practice of villifying Arabs and Muslims doesn't stop there. A recent Citizen front-page headline announced: "Ottawa Muslims accused of terrorism." The story related to an Ottawa-born man arrested by police on allegations of associating with suspected terrorists in London. He has yet to be proved a terrorist. The Post, in a recent editorial, speaks of "the barbaric standards of the Arab Middle East."

No one has suggested that Osama bin Laden and his killers are not terrorists. The are. But to blame an entire race and culture is wrong. In an article published in June of 2002, CanWest syndicated columnist George Jonas illustrates this practice: "Islam is at fault for blowing up citizens, including women and children." He added: "[Islam] is the new evil empire." Imagine what would happen if this generalization were said about Christians or Hindus or any other religion.

It gets worse. In October of 2001, a Post editorial said: "As George Jonas argues convincingly on the facing page, a small but substantial numbner of Canadian Muslims and Arabs are willing to assist terrorist operations." A week later, senior Post editor Jonathan Kay argued in a column titled "A healthy dose of bigotry" that Arab culture is unequal to others. "Multiculturalism is a relativistic creed that assumes all immigrant cultures are equally tolerant, civilized and enlightened once you scratch the surface."

Through CanWest's control of a large number of outlets in Canada, its influence is frightening. And through its incitement and propagation of anti-Arab hate, it is sowing discord in Canada.

It is time for Parliament to take a hard look at the impact and effect of media concentration in this country.