Francis Chartrand for Rivière-des-Mille-Îles

The Ombudsman Julie Miville-Dechêne (pictured right against) concluded that because of flaws in editorial control, the presentation of the film Peace, Propaganda and the Promised Land Issue Major reports violated journalistic standards and practices Radio-Canada. Ce film avance, sans en faire la preuve, que le gouvernement israélien contrôle les médias américains. The film advance without making the evidence that the Israeli government controls the American media. It contains anachronisms and inaccuracies groups and pro-Palestinian activists were involved in the research.

The decision of December 8 2008 Julie Miville-Dechêne bearing on the film Peace, Propaganda and the Promised Land released on October 23 2008 on the airwaves Network Information Radio-Canada (RDI), follows a request Reviewed by the Quebec-Israel Committee.

The Committee asked the Ombudsman to determine if the film and the guidance offered by RDI meet the journalistic standards and practices of Radio-Canada. The request for review concluded:

'By failing to identify the film as a documentary type of opinion committed and almost literally repeating the description of the perpetrator, RDI has violated journalistic standards and practices of Radio-Canada, which says that production should be clearly identified at the beginning and the end as a documentary author. " Ironically, while the facilitator asked Simon Durivage introduction if the American media does not distorted the trial of his public, RDI has contributed to the deformation of his own trial on the Arab-Israeli conflict. "

The decision of Mrs. Miville-Dechêne, reproduced below, meets each of the objections raised by the Quebec-Israel Committee.

But first, beyond the issue of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict being the decision of the Ombudsman, the whole media coverage of political Islam that we put in question at tipping point, on which we will return in depth.

When a report on ideology imperialist supremacy and hatred that has taken epidemic proportions among Muslims, as pointed out clearly the eminent Indian religious Wahiduddin Khan, who calls Muslims to work for introspection and deconditioning ideological ? This ideology to theological foundations that Khan calls to deconstruct, has led to countless massacres of innocent civilians around the world. It leads the Salafist Sunni Wahhabis of Saudi Arabia (11 / 9), the Deoband Pakistan (Mumbai), the Shiites of Iran and Hezbollah in Lebanon. It explains jihadist violence in Morocco, Tunisia, Sudan, Somalia, Yemen, Chechnya, the Philippines, Indonesia, Malaysia, Gaza, London, Madrid, and elsewhere. What is the common pattern here? It is obvious, but the media is split into four so as not to appoint, under cover of a misplaced political correctness is part of the problem rather than the solution, or a sense of objectivity Godard 's is mocked by the phrase "five minutes for Jews, five minutes for the Nazis."

Returning to our subject, let's first see what the Ombudsman Radio-Canada.

OMBUDSMAN OF RADIO-CANADA

The ombudsman's office is presented as follows on the website of Radio-Canada:

Accuracy, integrity, fairness

"The ombudsman Julie Miville-Dechêne is listening to you. It represents you, you viewers, listeners and Internet Radio-Canada. It assesses the merits of your complaints, to the best of his trial, and quite independently. You believe that information to our office or on our website is biased or inaccurate? Contact us. "

Radio-Canada has established journalistic standards and practices that describe how this institution funded by taxpayers meets public expectations and fulfills its obligations. These standards are quite detailed, and serve as a guide to the decisions of the Ombudsman.

****

Office of the Ombudsman Services French
On December 8, 2008

REVIEW documentary Peace, Propaganda and the Promised Land Released on 23 October 2008 to broadcast Major reports Network Information

Contents

More than 150 people have complained to my office dissemination of the documentary foreign pro-Palestinian Peace, Propaganda and the Promised Land, the issuance Major reports, the Network of Public Information (RDI) on 23 October 2008. They accuse the CBC for having aired a work of propaganda with errors of fact.

Radio-Canada has admitted a mistake: its journalistic standards and practices have not been respected in the presentation of the documentary. There was no mention of the date of production (2003) and the fact that the situation on the ground had changed since then, particularly because of the dismantling of Israeli settlements in the Gaza Strip.

Produced five years ago, the documentary contains inaccuracies and anachronisms, groups and pro-Palestinian activists were involved in the research.

Given the circumstances and vulnerabilities identified in editorial control, this documentary would not have been released.

COMPLAINTS

On 23 October 2008, issuing reports Major Network Information (RDI) presented a documentary entitled American Peace, Propaganda and the Promised Land, which focused on the image of Arab-Israeli conflict that carry the American media.

I received 156 complaints about this issue. Most complainants from various countries have responded to the call of pro-Israeli group monitoring media HonestReporting Canada. The pressure group urged its supporters online to send complaints to my office. Other Canadian viewers who have seen the show have also complained spontaneously to my office. For them, this is not a balanced documentary but a work of propaganda for the Palestinians, which contains errors of fact. Here is an excerpt from the complaint of Quebec-Israel Committee:

"(...) By failing to identify the film as a documentary

opinion type committed and showing almost literally

description of the author, RDI has violated the standards and

journalistic practices of Radio-Canada, which stipulate that

production should be clearly identified at the beginning and the

end as a documentary author (...)

The exclusive participation of activists and groups of employees

pressure and organized interests, as well as thanks

of production to those groups not only do they undermine

seriously the responsibility of the RDI to ensure that groups

interest policies [...] or pressure do not seek to

assert their views through this kind of productions, but

should raise with the RDI questions about

the independence of the film of any group that could

have a direct interest in the issue.

In presenting an indictment against unilateral either party

a conflict, RDI has failed in its duty to ensure fairness and balance

by failing to present in this other issue

views on the item, as stipulated Standards

and journalistic practices of Radio-Canada, the audience can

note that can draw different conclusions from the same facts.

Tolerating the many snags to the realities of film history,

RDI a political and diplomatic settlement of the Israeli-Palestinian RDI has

failed in its responsibility for the accuracy of the facts - applicable

even in the case of a document of opinion - and has failed to enforce

film the criterion of exceptional quality and relevance before

to disseminate, as stipulated in its own standards and journalism. (...) ".

Director, Complaint Handling and General Affairs, sent this reply to all complainants:

"We've received your comments on

Peace, Propaganda and the Promised Land, presented

at the major reports, RDI broadcast on October 23.

Let me first give you some explanations on

the context in which we broadcast documentaries. The

documentary focuses on personal point of view.

In the almost all cases, these documents are signed works

by directors from outside the CBC. We choose

to disseminate because we believe they contain

information of interest.

By airing documentaries opinion, Radio-Canada does

not promote the views contained therein. On

the contrary, it is part of our commitment to offering a

variety of perspectives on topics of public interest.

The documentary Peace, Propaganda and the Promised Land

contained interesting information to the Canadian public on the

treatment of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in the American media.

It was a U.S. production of a Media Education Foundation, distributed

by Mundovision.

However, this documentary is an updated version of a partial

document turned ago now four years before Israel

withdraw from Gaza. Therefore our presentation CW

should have put in context of four years ago rather

as a contemporary challenges posed the Middle East

on the eve of U.S. presidential elections of 2008.

It was indeed a very personalized the conflict.

We recognize that this view was clearly pro-Palestinian.

We wish to assure you that we have recently acquired

other documentaries offering glances different on the

situation in Israel and Gaza and we expect to circulate

in the coming months. (...) "

After receiving this response, several plaintiffs have asked me to review the issue because they believe this documentary simply would not have been broadcast, whatever may have been the presentation.

REVISION

The rules to follow

The information broadcast on Radio-Canada must respect the three principles at the heart of its journalistic standards and practices: the accuracy, integrity and fairness. However, there are exceptions for documentaries produced outside the house, including "documentaries of opinion within the meaning of documentaries engaged":

"The term documentary opinion is also used to describe a

work commenced or a thesis, an advocacy, based on facts,

calls for a solution or a point of view on a controversial subject.

Although the work is based on facts, it does not fairly the

variety of opinions that may exist on the subject or record.

The programmer must sometimes decide whether to disseminate

production significantly transgresses standards journalistic

Radio-Canada because this production openly takes sides on a

controversial issue, the point to exclude other relevant facts

and other items of view. (...) "

(NPJ A, 2.4)

The documentary Peace, Propaganda and the Promised Land satisfies these criteria. The film advance without making the evidence that the Israeli government controls the American media, written and electronic. To illustrate this thesis, the documentary uses excerpts from television news reports that pass over in silence the fact that the Palestinian territories occupied by Israel. According to the film, this omission, the choice of words and the systematic lack of context reinforces false perceptions in the American public. There is no fairness, balance or nuance here: the pro-Palestinian documentary presents a single point of view, only one side of the coin. All those interviewed - academics, Israeli and Palestinian activists, media critics and journalists - are in agreement with this view. If Radio-Canada chooses to present a documentary such rules apply:

Radio-Canada (...) should ensure that interest groups political or

economic or pressure groups, not seek to enforce their views

through this kind of production. "

(NPJ A, 2.4)

"The production should be clearly identified at the beginning and

the end as a documentary author. "

(NPJ A, 2.4, b)

"The facts should be accurate even if it is a work of opinion, and

arguments should conform to facts. (...) "

(NPJ A, 2.4, d)

The production is clearly identified?

The direction of Radio-Canada has quickly admitted its mistake: the presentation of this report does not respect the political journalism of Radio-Canada. Here is the transcript from this Great reports:

"Peace, Propaganda and the Promised Land.

The American media does

they see Israeli settlement in the occupied territories

a gesture of defense?

Welcome to Great reports. The signing of a peace agreement

in the Middle East before the end of 2008, as provided in the

Annapolis conference last year, is it still possible?

With the approach of the American election and the first two

Israeli and Palestinian ministers, both at their departure,

much in doubt. According to experts from the Middle East since

40 years, the settlement policy of the Jewish state has increased

inside the occupied Palestinian territories. Therefore:

Daily violence is both the Palestinian and Israeli sides.

So what message convey the American media on this

interminable conflict? They distort the trial of our neighbors

of South? "

At no time, nor in this presentation, or at the end of the show, it is said that it was a documentary view of a film commitment. No mention is made of its author or its production house American Media Education Foundation. In fact, the name of Montreal distributor who is at the beginning of the documentary and the generic. More troubling still, at any time or in the presentation or in the generic, it is said that the documentary was released in 2003, when I was confirmed by the producer.

Such omissions deprive viewers of vital information. However, the website of the production makes clear that this film in 2003. Five years in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is a long time. At that time we were in the second wave of the intifada. Since then, the situation has changed: the Israelis have withdrawn from the Gaza Strip, Ariel Sharon created a new party in favor of dismantling settlements before being terraced by two strokes and falling into a coma, Yasser Arafat is dead; Palestinians from Gaza have elected the radical Hamas and the Israelis have built a fence around the West Bank, suicide bombings have ended in Israel's offensive the Israeli army against Hezbollah in Lebanon has killed 1 200 .

The presentation gives the impression that the documentary is recent. The first director responsible for the content of documentaries on Radio-Canada recognizes that the context is lacking. In his opinion, should have been saying that the settlers and the Israeli army left Gaza, and perhaps ask the question to launch the documentary: "One wonders whether the situation has changed since then."

When Radio-Canada buys a documentary, it adapts, translates to the need and shortens, in this case from 52 to 43 minutes. It is a director who is responsible for this work. The director in question tells me he has not managed to find the date of production of the documentary. It chose instead to identify video clips in the documentary, excerpts dating from 2000 to 2003.

The journalist in search charged with writing the show, admits his error. He was captured, he said, by another series of documentaries. Two hundred documentaries must be adapted to the major stories in every IRD year.

The director of Radio-Canada responsible for acquisitions said that, on paper and during the viewing, Peace, Propaganda and the Promised Land seemed worthwhile because the documentary presented a new angle on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The director believed that the work was contemporary, since 2008 in the catalog of "international documentary programs," Peace, Propaganda and the Promised Land was described as "production".

He said that the distributor has not warned that the movie was not recent. For its part, distributor remembers that Peace, Propaganda and the Promised Land was released in room in early 2005. However, Radio-Canada has recognized the true date of production (2003) when complaints began to accumulate. The craftsmen who I spoke to me all said they will be more vigilant in the future.

The big difference between documentary and the 2003 version distributed in October 2008 to RDI is its duration. The original work is 80 minutes, the distributor asked the producer to reduce his film to 52 minutes to sell it to TV. The distributor has registered a narration to accompany the abbreviated version. It has removed some glaring anachronisms in the international version in English. In my opinion, this is not enough to talk about "updating". You can see the documentary and read the full transcript on the site of the production: http://www.mediaed.org/cgi-bin/commerce.cgi

A author Documentary pro-Palestinian or a work of propaganda?

Radio-Canada must ensure that it buys documentaries are not propaganda tools of lobbyists. If Radio-Canada had viewed the full 80 minutes of Peace, Propaganda and the Promised Land, it would have realized that by the end of the film can be read thanks to several militant groups pro-Palestinian (Electronic Antifada, Al -Awda Right of Return Coalition, Islam Online). The producer and director assures me that these lobbyists have not funded his film, but only provided assistance for research.

This proximity between militant groups and documentary is disturbing. For example, a data-shocks of the documentary is that only 4 percent of the new state television that the West Bank and Gaza are "occupied". A small note at the bottom of the screen attributes this statistic in 2001 the group Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting FAIR. This is a pro-Palestinian group monitoring the media for the pro-Israel group CAMERA (Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America) and HonestReporting, the source of many complaints to my office against this documentary. This is not independent research.

It would have taken at least that these facts are known to Radio-Canada so that it may be part of the evaluation of the editorial product.

The facts are they true?

Even if it is a documentary of opinion, the arguments must be based on facts, under the rules Radio-Canada. But the obvious anachronisms. Of anachronisms that are not believing the viewer warned that Gaza is still occupied by the army and Israeli settlers. The reality is quite different: the settlers left the Gaza Strip since 2005, the Israeli army evacuated the territory, although it still encircles and control the entry and exit of Palestinians and goods.

At 3 minutes and a half early, it can be read at the bottom of the screen: "The West Bank and Gaza Strip under military occupation."

At 9 minutes into "So we could say that in addition to the occupation of the West Bank and Gaza, Israel (...)."

At 12 minutes into the narrator says: "... Four percent of the media network 2 on the occupied West Bank and the Gaza Strip indicate that they are occupied territories."

At 20 minutes 17 at the beginning, the narrator says: "The Palestinian territories are dotted with settlements that are established in strategic (...) settlements with the neighboring land they have appropriate control over 40% the West Bank and Gaza Strip. "On screen, we see a map of small white dots, illustrating the settlements dot the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

The first was erroneous overprint added by the director of Radio-Canada that adaptation. Neither him, nor anyone has noticed anachronisms before the CW. Even if the director who adapted the work tells me that he thought the documentary was "limited", it has not expressed its concerns to staff framework. Result: no connection charge has viewed the documentary before it is released.

The convener Simon Durivage is not responsible for these errors. He records the presentations that he prepares between two direct interventions RDI, where he is on the air four hours or more per day.

The failure to mention the withdrawal from Gaza is not trivial, because part of the argument of the film is based on the following statement: "The purpose of Israel is permanently annexing the occupied territories" . That may be true for part of the West Bank, but it has already proved false in the Gaza Strip.

Other inaccuracies:

The fighting in Jenin in 2002. "This event, although widely condemned as a war crime by organizations of human rights, was minimized by the American media who gave écartèrent involved and the possibility of a massacre." (Excerpt of the documentary). On the Palestinian side, there was talk at the time of 500 victims. An investigation by Human Rights Watch concluded that there was no evidence of the massacre. Fifty-seven Palestinians and twenty-four Israelis have died in these clashes.

"Israel's position is anything but defensive.": This is a dubious generalization.

The occupied territories, "a foreign country: the West Bank and Gaza Strip are not part of Israel. These territories are under no jurisdiction. The Palestinians want to make a country, but it is not yet a reality.

On several occasions, the documentary refers to the occupation "illegal" Palestinian territories by Israel. The legal reality is more complex: the Jewish settlements and the erection of a security fence in the West Bank are clearly illegal. But experts disagree about the "illegal" any Israeli military presence in the West Bank because of the ambiguity in the English version of resolution 242 United Nations (1967). The withdrawal must be "territories" (from territories). The Israeli withdrawal from all territories it is mandatory or not under resolution 242? The interpretation of this clause has never been clarified by the courts.

On this issue, the director of the grid RDI think that the CBC has no staff necessary to verify the facts contained in the 200 documentaries purchased each year. Hence the importance of a strong write to the warnings required for the viewers. The first director responsible for the content of documentary adds that the CBC trusted foreign producers known (eg., BBC), but the Company can not abandon its responsibility to seriously evaluate the content of broadcast works.

The two executives, who have several responsibilities, say it is unthinkable for them to watch all the documentaries before putting on the air, especially that to buy 200, one must view the double. When artisans have doubts about a documentary, they should seek advice from one of their superiors. This time, no alarm was triggered throughout the process. The director of the grid RDI believes this is an isolated event, which should not obscure the work done for 14 years. In light of this error, the first director of the documentary says it needs tighter control editorial Service acquisitions.

The documentary would it have been broadcast or not?

The fact that this documentary is favorable for the Palestinian cause is not in question here. Radio-Canada has the right to broadcast films opinion, provided they are clearly presented as such. Radio-Canada must also encourage a diversity of views in its programming. There is no strict accounting on the "views" disseminated about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, but the first director ensures that the interests of diversity exists. Before this controversy erupted, he had bought the rights of Israeli interesting documentary to be broadcast in early 2009.

The first director think this documentary deserved to be released because of the fame of some of the participants. It is of the opinion that to preserve the integrity of the work, do not get to touch here and there so that the film has more air after five years. It is therefore not agree with the approach of the dealer who says he is an update of Peace, Propaganda and the Promised Land in 2008.

Le producteur et réalisateur du documentaire est convaincu que son film est toujours pertinent. The producer and director of the documentary is convinced that his film is still relevant. He said: "This will not change that Gaza is no longer colonized by Israel, since that territory has become an open-air prison." The situation on the ground has not changed, and it is always also true in his opinion that the American media, written or electronic, routinely fail to mention the occupation of the West Bank and the reasons behind the Palestinian resistance. He is preparing a new movie on the cover made by the American media about the Gaza Strip and the Israeli offensive in Lebanon.

Conclusion

The error has already been recognized by the management of Radio-Canada. The Standards and journalistic practices have not been respected in the presentation of foreign documentary Peace, Propaganda and the Promised Land, distributed to broadcast Major reports, on 23 October 2008. Radio-Canada should have specified that it was a documentary engaged, that the situation on the ground had changed since five years, date of production of the film, particularly since Israel withdrew from Gaza . Finally, it should be clear that a work was produced abroad.

Given the circumstances and vulnerabilities identified in editorial control, this documentary would not have been released.

Julie Miville-Dechêne Julie Miville-Dechêne
Ombudsman Services French
Société Radio-Canada Canadian Broadcasting Corporation
2008-12-08 2008-12-08

E-mail: ombudsman@radio-Canada.ca

Web: http://www.radio-canada.ca/ombudsman/index.shtml

Labels: Anne Humphreys, Canada, Islam, Palestine, Radio-Canada

# posted by Francis Chartrand @ 11:09 AM