The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) has announced a significant shift in its policy regarding the use of the term 'terrorism' to describe the September 11, 2001, attacks on the United States. Previously, CBC required the term to be attributed to a source. Now, direct attribution is no longer necessary when referring to the 9/11 attacks as terrorism. This change comes ahead of the 25th anniversary of the events and follows substantial criticism from various quarters.
Policy Change and Criticism
Basem Boshra, the senior director of journalistic standards at CBC, explained the policy change in a blog post. He noted that CBC had always guided its reporting on terrorism with the principle of attribution. However, the broadcaster has now decided that the 9/11 attacks have become an 'impediment to clarity and public understanding,' necessitating a policy adjustment. Despite the change, CBC will continue to attribute causes and motivations for new acts of politically or ideologically motivated violence to officials and experts.
The announcement has drawn sharp criticism, particularly from senior Trump administration officials and conservative opposition leader Pierre Poilievre in Canada. FBI Director Kash Patel described the previous directive as 'an insult to the souls lost during our largest terrorist attack in US history.' The US ambassador to Canada also joined the criticism, which has surfaced amid ongoing trade tensions between the two nations.
Background and Context
The CBC's internal language guide had previously instructed staff not to use the word 'terrorism' to describe 9/11 without attribution. This guideline was intended to maintain journalistic integrity by ensuring that terms with strong emotional and political connotations were not used without proper sourcing. However, the directive sparked significant backlash, leading to the policy revision.
In Canada, the debate over the terminology used to describe 9/11 reflects broader discussions about media responsibility, historical accuracy, and the emotional weight of language. The policy change at CBC underscores the complexities involved in reporting on sensitive and highly charged events, balancing journalistic principles with public perception and historical truth.
