Editor’s note: The Canada Files is the country's only news outlet focused on Canadian foreign policy. We've provided critical investigations & hard-hitting analysis on Canadian foreign policy since 2019, and need your support.

Please consider setting up a monthly or annual donation through Donorbox.

Written by: Yves Engler

Does anyone seriously believe that ethnicity/religion has no bearing on media coverage of Palestine? And why would a leftist seek to excuse a community (broadly) promoting a holocaust?

At a recent forum on Palestine, I spoke alongside the managing editor of The Breach, Martin Lukacs, about media bias. In my opening remarks, I discussed the uniqueness of Canada’s support for Israel, the longtime head of Postmedia chairing an extremist Zionist organization and the media’s refusal to cover a poll highlighting Jewish Israeli racism.

Afterwards Lukacs (unprompted) denied any ethnic/religious contribution to the anti-Palestinian character of Canada’s media. His central observation was that the Globe and Mail was owned by the WASP (white Anglo-Saxon and Protestant) Thompson family and it was biased against Palestinians so anti-Palestinianism in the media simply reflected the establishment. He repeated the point in a subsequent comment in which he said the military-industrial complex and corporate lobbyists were wealthier and more powerful than pro-Israel forces. Lukacs emphasized that suggesting ethnicity played any role in Canada’s media bias offended him.

It requires only cursory knowledge of Canada’s media to know Lukacs’ claim is mistaken. His position is also morally bankrupt, inverting a basic moral principle.

Canada’s largest newspaper chain was established by Jewish Zionist, Izzy Asper, who imposed an aggressively anti-Palestinian editorial line when he added the Montreal Gazette, Ottawa Citizen, Vancouver Sun and other daily papers to his media empire in the early 2000s. It’s well documented as it sparked a Montreal Gazette publisher to resign and Reuters to formally complain about their wire copy being rewritten in a biased, anti-Palestinian, manner.

Asper’s CanWest was saved from bankruptcy and expanded into Postmedia in 2010 by a Jewish Zionist board member of the news agency, Paul Godfrey. He was then president of the National Post and Godfrey had previously led the Toronto Sun. As I mentioned in my opening remarks, Paul’s son, Noah Godfrey, chaired the recent Walk for Israel in Toronto.

A thorough analysis of Canadian media ownership would no doubt uncover other examples of Jewish Zionist owners contributing to anti-Palestinian bias. But ownership is but a small part of how Jewish organizations/power/sensitivities impact the media.

Jews are overrepresented in positions of influence within Canada’s media. In Saturday’s Globe and Mail, for instance, the op-ed page was entirely Jewish. From a community representing 1 per cent of Canada’s population (about 4 per cent in Toronto), Marsha Lederman and Robyn Urback regularly take up two thirds of the weekend op-ed page. On Saturday they were joined by Michael Geist who also foregrounds his Jewishness when justifying Israeli crimes.

The journalist who moderated the recent English language federal election debate, Steve Paikin, has also spotlighted his Jewishness while justifying Israeli violence. The prominent TV Ontario anchor’s former senior producer, Wodek Szemberg, posted on X that when Palestinians “start acting like human beings, they will be treated accordingly.”

Probably the clearest example of Jewish over-representation leading to anti-Palestinianism in the media is Howard Levitt. The corporate labour lawyer has long written a column in the Financial Post to assist bosses in weakening labour. In the year after the October 7 attack, however, Levitt turned his business column into an anti-Palestinian screed. Levitt openly links his Jewishness to his genocide promotion.

Beyond those in the media, there’s a large pro-Israel Jewish institutional infrastructure working to elicit sympathetic media coverage. The Exigent Foundation has brought many journalists to Israel in recent months while a bevy of well financed groups organize Israel related speaking events, films, exhibits and rallies.

More important, Jewish Zionist organizations and individuals have created probably the most powerful ever media disciplining apparatus/ideology. The most obvious example is Honest Reporting Canada. That media flak organization benefits from the power of a slew of Israel lobby groups (CIJA, Jewish federations, Bnai Brith, etc.) and wealthy donors (Adams, Schwartz, Tanenbaum, etc.) as well as broader imperial, settler colonial, Christian Zionist, anti-Muslim, etc. forces. As significant, Honest Reporting is boosted by a uniquely powerful ideological stick largely built by Jewish Zionist organizations and individuals. The ‘antisemitism industrial complex’, which I recently detailed, terrifies the media and intelligentsia.

But these facts are secondary to my main point, which is the immorality of Lukacs’ position. In his opening remarks (before mine) Lukacs centred his Jewishness in explaining how he approaches Palestine. He talked about participating in a Birthright trip, which brings young Jews to Israel, twenty years ago (he then stayed on with the Palestine solidarity movement). As someone identifying as Jewish and benefiting from the privileges associated with Israel — immediate citizenship, supremacist laws, greater insulation from smears, etc. — shouldn’t Lukacs prioritize upending the Jewish network promoting genocide?

Instead, he seeks to exculpate Jewish institutions and individuals promoting apartheid and genocide.

A year ago Lukacs published a widely circulated six-minute explainer on “Why Canada is one of Israel’s most extreme defenders?”. It entirely ignored Jewish lobbying/power, focusing on shared settler colonialism and the US empire. Yet within a few kilometers of where Lukacs lives dozens of Jewish institutions promote apartheid and genocide. The largest one has a whopping $2 billion in assets and close ties to the Liberal Party’s chief fundraiser Stephen Bronfman. Has Lukacs ever written about, organized a protest or participated in an action targeting these Jewish institutions that constantly defend and promote Israel?

Lukacs doesn’t want to bring any heat on Jewish institutions. As Israel seeks to kill or ethnically cleanse all non-Jews from Gaza, he still centres Jewish sensitivities.

I say this with confidence as I’ve discussed these subjects with him for two decades and he’s constantly centred Jewish sensitivities. While the positions shift as the movement makes headway, the holding back, centring of Jewish sensitivities, remains. He has defended a Jewish state and argued against describing Zionism as “Jewish supremacy”. He’s argued against boycotts and enforces an anti-Palestinian definition of antisemitism at his publication. In a 2021 column, he edited out criticism of Canada’s special envoy on antisemitism and explicitly rejected my writing for the Breach on the grounds that I was antisemitic.

Even 20 months into the unspeakable horrors in Gaza, Lukacs remains committed to Jewish sensitivities. It’s an inversion of a basic moral principle. If you consider yourself Jewish it’s your responsibility to challenge your community’s deplorable behaviour. And there’s a stunning amount of it. Just this week Montreal’s main Jewish food bank turned its fundraiser into a celebration of the Israeli military while its largest Jewish community centre is launching a speakersseries with an open racist.

This is irrelevant to Lukacs. But he’s not above boycotting an author challenging it. Anything that resembles an antisemitic trope, even if factual and relevant, cannot be discussed.

He may think identifying Jewish organizational and individual culpability for Israel’s crimes will lead to more antisemitism and he may well be right. But isn’t that an argument for trying to stop what these Jewish organizations and individuals are doing? Especially for those who self-identify as Jewish. Instead, Lukacs seems to believe it is better to deny the self-proclaimed connection between Canadian support for Israel and supporters’ Jewishness. As well as being the opposite of the ‘truth will set you free’ would Lukacs likewise insist on not discussing the connection between evangelical Christianity and the extreme right in Canada? Or Hindu nationalism and the extreme right in India?

To win a battle for the hearts and minds of Canadians to support Palestinians we must understand who we are fighting against, what they are doing and how they are doing it. Prioritizing Jewish sensitivities in this battle is not helpful.

How many Palestinians have to be killed before Martin Lukacs stops seeking to exculpate Canada’s Jewish community from its responsibility in Israel’s genocide?

Yves Engler is the author of 13 books. His latest book, available now, is "Canada's Long Fight Against Democracy”.

More Articles

Featured