Even the tiniest of details can spark an angry letter
Protests in Toronto stemming from the ongoing Israel-Hamas war have been challenging for the media to cover, including the Toronto Star.
Aside from accurately documenting what people who speak at these events say (I don’t recall receiving any complaints from the public that we’ve misquoted any speakers), we need to ensure we’re providing sufficient background context, being fair to both sides with the facts we publish, all while giving readers colour and a good sense of what’s happening.
For the participants at these rallies, tensions are usually elevated. Nerves are frayed. Hurtful words are thrown back and forth.
It isn’t easy for journalists thrown in the middle of all of this.
Even the tiniest of details in our stories, opinion columns and features on these rallies can spark an angry letter. Such was the case when one of our writers recently described Toronto Police officers bringing “trays of Tim Hortons coffee” to pro Palestinian demonstrators gathered at a highway overpass earlier this year.
This is “outright false” one reader thundered in an email to my office. The reader felt our writer’s overall description suggested the cops had a cosy relationship with the protesters.
“The police did not deliver ‘trays’ of Tim Hortons, but rather a box of coffee … Call me petty, but it’s a lie. It makes it sound worse than it was — that seems to be the intention.” The reader demanded a retraction.
My point here is that every word in our articles on Israel-Hamas protests in the city, every headline, photo and photo cutline, is being microscopically scrutinized by many of our readers looking for any signs of bias or inaccuracies on our part. Rightfully so.
As a result, Star editors, reporters and photographers are carefully weighing, discussing, even debating stories and images before we publish.
Mostly we’ve been getting it right the first time.
We fix things when we don’t. For example, the Star received flak from Toronto police over an opinion column we published this month about how the service and RCMP responded to security issues raised at a planned meeting between Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, at the Art Gallery of Ontario.
Briefly, the two were set to attend a reception at the AGO to cap a day of meetings. But the evening get-together was abruptly cancelled. Pro-Palestinian protesters, about 400 according to police estimates, gathered outside the AGO to loudly criticize the two leaders for their handling of the Israel-Hamas conflict.
Some protesters blocked the entrances, keeping key political figures, including headliners Trudeau and Meloni, from getting in.
In a statement, the RCMP said the crowd size and the “volatile nature of the crowds at the entrances to the venue,” meant Trudeau and Meloni couldn’t safely be brought into the building.
Toronto police said in a statement that “ultimately the Prime Minister’s team decided not to proceed. It was not at (the Toronto police service’s) recommendation that the event be cancelled, and many guests were already inside.”
Some observers criticized the protesters for bringing the high-profile event to a halt.
But others said the demonstrators were simply exercising their right to protest.
Toronto Star opinion columnist Andrew Phillips weighed in, criticizing Toronto police and RCMP for the security fail.
“You’d think security forces — police and the RCMP detail responsible for the prime minister’s security — would make sure an event like that was held at a venue that wouldn’t be so vulnerable to a completely predictable protest,” the columnist wrote.
“You’d think they’d be ready for a few hundred screaming demonstrators who’ve been turning up all round the city,” Phillips added.
But Toronto police spokesperson Stephanie Sayer wrote to the Star seeking a correction, saying, “Toronto police do not decide where events involving the Prime Minister and his guests are held, and operational planning around his security is led by the RCMP.”
Phillips responded to her reasonably in an email, saying he was surprised that Toronto police would have no input into the choice of venue for such meetings, given our local police service was called upon to provide security for the AGO event.
“I don’t contest what you’re saying, but it seems bizarre that if the RCMP advises the TPS that two leaders plan to meet at such and such a location, the (Toronto police service) would not have input into the security implications of that.
“The TPS would surely have more detailed knowledge about such things as entrances/exits, etc., and would know how that would affect its ability to provide proper security,” Phillips wrote to Sayer.
“No,” Sayer replied, adding: “I can assure you that (Toronto police) are not asked for our input on the Prime Minister’s plans.”
Frankly, as public editor, I may well have made the same assumptions Phillips did had I been reporting on this event.
Regardless, we tweaked the column online to remove the reference to Toronto police being responsible for the PM’s security and we added a clarification note.
Star readers are watching our words closely — especially on Israel-Hamas and the fallout from the local protests.
Apparently, so are the police.
Every word in our articles on Israel-Hamas protests in the city, every headline, photo and photo cutline, is being microscopically scrutinized by many of our readers looking for any signs of bias or inaccuracies on our part. Rightfully so