The lens of objectivity on covering Israel-Palestine in Canadian newsrooms

Image by Trisha Sales.

As the pandemic continues; activism on social media has been amplified for many human rights movements. Some of those movements have been around since history can remember, but for a lot of people, it’s a new story. 

I was confronted by a post on what I once referred to as the Israel-Palestine “conflict,” and this time it’s being debunked. More posts appeared on social media that seemed “complicated” for many people because of different views from both sides that contradict each other. 

I can understand why people are hesitant when it comes to showing solidarity. One of those reasons is the confusion regarding different views when it comes to the historical context being presented on social media and the fear of taking the wrong side, which most likely lead people to count themselves out of the issue. 

Being a journalist of colour, I can admit that I grew up forming my own beliefs towards the situation. It is a movement that I feel deeply connected to for many reasons, including my identity and struggles that I share as a minority. To clarify, before entering journalism school, I had my own biases. I am also aware that although it is innate to have opinions, we are required to put them aside when it comes to covering stories so that it can be delivered objectively. But is there such thing as unbiased reporting? I mean, no one is truly free from their own biases. 

“No matter how intricate it seems when it comes to the nuance of historical contexts, my bottom line is to always ask myself: who has more power and whose voices are not being heard?”

It is difficult to escape these challenges as a minority especially from someone who comes from a lineage of family whose resistance is practiced against many forms of injustice. No matter how intricate it seems when it comes to the nuance of historical contexts, my bottom line is to always ask myself: who has more power and whose voices are not being heard? I use these questions as a guide to help me include voices that are important and often misrepresented. 

It allows me to combat the surface level of “objectivity” and challenges me to dig deep which in on its own includes a raw and deep form of storytelling. This is not to benefit off of people’s experiences by sensationalizing stories, but to capture the grey areas that are not told, or often misrepresented. I know that I am speaking for myself right now, as I can only do. However, I have heard many journalists of colour who are on the same boat, and for many, it is also the reason why they entered the profession only to find out their identity will be the one to put them under scrutiny on whether or not they can work professionally and deliver the news objectively and impartially. 

If there’s anything that all journalists can agree on, it is that curiosity and empathy are one of many elements that make up a great story. Without empathy, you lose the human connection and the ability to paint a picture of someone else's life. We also know that empathy doesn’t negate objectivity. We’re taught that objectivity helps bring in different perspectives. The components consist of absence of bias and accuracy. 

“It is important to ask the question on whether or not being impartial exists in the face of oppression and how is objectivity measured in the face of one group's suffering?”

The Israel-Palestine rabbit hole on “two sides to the story” is used to display both objectivity and impartiality. However, there's a huge emphasis to not use the words “conflict” or “war” demanded by the Palestinian community and those who stands in solidarity. This information is crucial because it suggests symmetry in power which the Palestinians do not possess. The Palestinians do not have an army or weapons funded to them like how Israel is funded and supported by the U.S. Not to mention, Israel also has one of the most technologically advanced military in the world.

It is important to ask the question on whether or not being impartial exists in the face of oppression and how is objectivity measured in the face of one group's suffering?

Journalists are required to use their valuable judgements and although Israel and Palestine both take presence in stories, their sides are told differently. How can we (journalists) provide a “balanced” story if the reality shows that one overpowers the other? This defeats the purpose of objectivity because it is purposely finding an angle to fit the mould of “balance” instead of reporting on the situation of how it actually is as if the imbalance of power is far from the truth.

Not only is it hurting the most vulnerable, but it is also hurting the media’s reputation to those who are governed.

“The lens of objectivity is only afforded to white journalists and the human element is lost the moment oppression is overlooked and altered just to fit the mould of neutrality. It is dehumanizing.”

This made me reflect on the movie called The Post which shows the true story of how the federal district court injunction stopped the New York Times from publishing articles about the American government’s deception on their occupation in Vietnam and Southeast Asia. It was a revolutionary transition to protect the role of the press in democracy. The Supreme court Hugo Black, an American Lawyer, and politician who served as a U.S. senator from 1927 to 1927 said:

In the First Amendment the Founding Fathers gave the free press the protection it must have to fulfill its essential role in our democracy. The press was to serve the governed, not the governors. The Government’s power to censor the press was abolished so that the press would remain forever free to censure the Government. The press was protected so that it could bear the secrets of the government and inform the people. Only a free and unrestrained press can effectively expose deception in government.

To serve the governed is to report truthfully with the intention of keeping the vulnerable communities in mind as well. The lens of objectivity is only afforded to white journalists and the human element is lost the moment oppression is overlooked and altered just to fit the mould of neutrality. It is dehumanizing.

“The lack of diversity has a huge impact on storytelling. Diversity brings in depth and unique perspectives.”

This affects reporters who are being told that they can’t report on issues that are anyway related. Let’s imagine the perpetual dynamic in which only white journalists who don't understand the struggle or deep historical context behind the stories can only report on such issues. Do we really want news to be completely disconnected from communities? The lack of diversity has a huge impact on storytelling. Diversity brings in depth and unique perspectives.

Not to mention the mistrust that already exists between the media and the public for so many years. It is indeed a fact that many racialized communities feel misrepresented, and this is something that most people of colour, including journalists, understand and resonate with. 

CJOJ (Canadian Journalist of Colour) was created to address and rethink about the diversity gap in the newsrooms. The executive stands on the movement that many journalists brought to light about the unfair coverage that’s currently happening between Palestine and Israel. So many journalists signed the petition to demand fair coverage.

Many who signed the petition are afraid of being reprimanded. A Canadian journalist, Fatima Syed, shared a guide on Twitter on how to talk to Canadian newsroom managers to address the open letter for those who signed the petition. The petition was made by a group of concerned journalists. 

The letter explains that objectivity will still be maintained when it comes to covering Israel and Palestine. It will be covered with nuance and historical context. It just needs unique perspective in a way that it will not be harmful to the Palestinian community and not leave out context from the Israeli community, nor will it promote anti-semitism.

The fact that the CJOC exists and that there are guides created to avoid reprimandation, as well as the pressure from journalists of colour to prove their professionalism, is very clear that Canadian media still needs to work on diversity and equity, as well as rethinking objectivity. 

The voice of Palestinian journalists or anyone who has deep knowledge about the region should not have to fight for a spot to report on the situation that’s going on in Jerusalem. If we are going to measure objectivity on how well a journalist is disconnected from the story, then the news industry does not place priority on the one who is governed. It overlooks the human connection, and once again, puts white journalists on top of the list to be given opportunities in the media, which only perpetuates the whitewashing of Canadian newsroom practices.

Isa Magazine is entirely volunteer-powered and is a labour of love and self-funded by our founder & editor-in-chief alone. If you enjoyed this article, please consider sharing it on your social media to spread our work. Thanks so much!