The CBC article on this event published on January 30th is a good example of corrupted, inaccurate reporting.
CBC writes that "Pro-Palestinian activists" had called for a boycott of products from Israel's illegal settlements in the West Bank.
Two salient points that should not have been ignored in this article, unless the CBC was intentionally seeking to cover up and hide the truth:
1) The Boycott Campaign was promulgated by dozens of Palestinian civil organisations.It was a cry for help by Palestinian people. Does it really make sense to call them "pro-Palestinian"? They are Palestinians struggling for justice for their own people - is this a question of pros and cons? CBC's wording implies that the boycott campaign is just some scam engineered by "activists" who are, for some unknown reason, also pro-Palestinian.
2) The boycott campaign is a non-violent initiative designed to bring justice to people who are suffering injustice. This non-violent element should be emphasized. CBC never hesitates to clearly report on violent initiatives like terrorism and intifada. When the Palestinians choose non-violence, the world should respect this choice and publicize it through the media. Why does CBC fail to do this? Who are they working for? Certainly not working to keep Canadians informed on the realities of the Middle East.
However in the article CBC still had space to quote a Jewish group that characterized the boycott campaign as "anti-Israeli"? What exactly does anti-Israeli mean in this context? When Palestinians are fed up with Israeli oppression, is it really meaningful to describe their feelings as anti-Israeli? or is it more accurate to describe their feelings as "anti-oppression". Quoting a Jewish and Israeli propagandist, without balancing them with at least one quote from one of the Palestinian civil groups that launched the boycott campaign is unbalanced journalism - just par for the course for CBC.