As this war goes on and opinions become more divided, I keep coming back to the same question: is CBC really giving Canadians the full picture?

CBC is not just another news outlet. It is our public broadcaster, funded by Canadians and trusted by many Canadians. So when it says it aims for balance, I think that promise deserves a closer look.

Since October 7, I’ve been paying very close attention.

Why I’m Asking

I’m not a journalist, and I’m not writing this as an academic expert. But I do know CBC unusually well. I listen to it all the time, in Montreal, in Jerusalem, and everywhere in between thanks to streaming, podcasts, and archived programs.

After a while, you start to notice patterns. You notice what gets emphasized, what gets repeated, and what slips into the background. Since October 7, I’ve been listening even more carefully to how CBC covers the war involving Israel, Hamas, Hezbollah, Syria, the Houthis, and Iran, with Qatar, Turkey, and Egypt also involved.

And to be honest, what I’ve been hearing has left me uneasy.

Why I’m Writing This

These concerns have been building for a while. I even raised them directly with CBC leadership. I wrote to then-CEO Catherine Tait, and she passed my letter along to Brodie Fenlon, head of CBC News. His response was that CBC strives for balance.

I don’t doubt that this is the intention. But intention and outcome are not always the same thing.

Because balance is not just about sounding measured. It is also about which stories are chosen, how they are framed, what context is included, and whose voices are given the authority to explain events to the rest of us.

That’s where, for me, CBC’s coverage starts to feel incomplete.

What Does “Balanced” Actually Look Like?

CBC’s style guide speaks of neutrality. But neutrality is not automatic. It is not something a newsroom can simply declare and be done with. It comes from daily editorial choices, made over and over again.

And in this case, those choices are being questioned from more than one side.

From a pro-Israel point of view, critics argue that CBC often downplays Hamas’s role as a terrorist organization, softens the language used for the atrocities of October 7, and focuses heavily on Palestinian suffering while giving less attention to Israeli trauma, hostage families, or the daily threat of rocket fire.

From a pro-Palestinian point of view, critics say CBC relies too much on Israeli or Western official sources, uses language that echoes the Israeli government’s framing, and does not give enough weight to the devastation in Gaza or to criticism of Canada’s foreign policy.

Both sides say something is missing. CBC says it is trying to be balanced. So I think the real question is simple: what are Canadians actually hearing day after day?

The Patterns I Keep Noticing

At one point, I searched “CBC coverage of Middle East crisis” and looked through the results. What stayed with me was not just one headline, but the pattern.

Again and again, the headlines focused on Palestinian casualties and suffering in Gaza:

“7 children killed in Israeli strike while lining up for food”
“Health officials say Israeli airstrikes, gunfire leave 60 dead in Gaza”
“Canadian doctors work in Gaza as fuel shortages threaten lives”

These are important stories. I’m not questioning that for a second.

But when I looked at the broader picture, I noticed that 10 of the 12 headlines in my scan were about Palestinian casualties or humanitarian crisis.

What I did not see was similar attention to Israeli hostage families, October 7 survivors, or the continuing reality of rocket fire that still sends Israelis running to bomb shelters.

Those stories exist. They are not obscure. They are not hard to find. Yet they rarely seem to shape CBC’s lead coverage in the same way.

And that imbalance is what troubles me.

One Example That Stayed With Me: Front Burner

One recent episode of Front Burner focused on Netanyahu’s trip to Washington and the aid crisis in Gaza. Early in the conversation, Jayme Poisson asked, “Benjamin Netanyahu is in Washington, meeting Trump and U.S. lawmakers… What have you made of Netanyahu’s trip?” Meron Rapoport answered by focusing on Netanyahu’s political future, saying that after the war on Iran, Netanyahu saw “an opportunity to end the war and go to early elections,” while also arguing that his legacy was tied to preventing a Palestinian state.

As I listened, I noticed how quickly the conversation moved toward Netanyahu’s political calculations and then toward Gaza’s suffering, with much less attention given to the broader regional context, including the strategic significance of U.S.-Israeli military cooperation in Iran.

Later, Poisson said, “Now, I’m hoping we can focus on the suffering in Gaza and the monstrous system of aid distribution.”

That suffering absolutely deserves coverage. I want to be clear about that. But as I listened, I kept wondering: where was the comparable attention to Israel’s reality, the trauma of October 7, the anguish of hostage families, or the security fears that shape Israeli decision-making?

Meron Rapoport is a serious journalist, and his perspective has every right to be heard. My question is not why he was there. My question is: where was the counterbalance?

Another Example: As It Happens

I heard something similar on As It Happens.

In one segment, CBC focused on the human toll of an Israeli airstrike, which is important. But the rocket fire targeting Israeli civilians before that strike was mentioned only briefly, almost in passing.

That kind of framing matters.

When coverage begins with the aftermath of an Israeli strike but gives very little context for what led to it, audiences are left with only part of the story. And when that happens again and again, partial truth can start to feel like the whole truth.

Why This Matters

This matters because CBC helps shape how Canadians understand the world.

When coverage feels incomplete, it shapes public opinion. It influences policy debates. And at a time when antisemitism and Islamophobia are both rising, selective storytelling can deepen division instead of helping people understand a painful and complicated reality.

Canadians deserve better than simplified narratives.

We deserve reporting that informs rather than steers us, that adds context instead of leaving it out, and that trusts the public enough to face the full complexity of this war.

What’s Missing

CBC leadership says fairness is the goal. I believe they may sincerely mean that. But when so much coverage presents Gaza mainly through tragedy and Israel mainly through accusation or military response, something essential gets lost.

And what gets lost is not propaganda. It is context.

It is the human reality on both sides.

It is the recognition that Israelis are not only actors in this war, but also victims of it.

And it is the willingness to cover Palestinian suffering without erasing the events and threats that continue to shape Israeli life.

Where I Look for a Fuller Picture

• IDSF Daily Briefings, for open-source Israeli security updates
• Israel RealTime, for reporting on daily life and wartime realities inside Israel
• CBC Program Archives, which let listeners go back, read transcripts, and decide for themselves

A Final Reflection

In Jewish tradition, the month of Tamuz is associated with clarity of vision. I find myself thinking about that a lot these days.

Because clarity is exactly what feels so scarce.

And I keep returning to John Donne’s line, later echoed by Hemingway:

“Never send to know for whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee.”

This war diminishes everyone, Israeli, Palestinian, Jewish, Muslim, religious, secular. And when public media loses clarity, the public loses something too. We lose the ability to see honestly. And once that starts to happen, it becomes much harder to think clearly, respond fairly, or remain humane.

That is why I keep asking this question.

And that is why I believe CBC’s coverage deserves closer scrutiny.