Canada’s public broadcaster is facing mounting pressure from the FBI and US Republican lawmakers after an internal memo revealed it had instructed journalists not to independently describe the 11 September 2001 attacks as “terrorist attacks” ahead of the atrocity’s 25th anniversary.
The guidance, issued by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation and first reported by Toronto Sun columnist Warren Kinsella, tells staff to prefer language such as “the Sept. 11 attacks” unless the term “terrorist” is directly attributed to another source. The memo applies the same approach to other major attacks, including the 2005 London bombings, the 2004 Madrid train bombings and the 2011 bombing at a Moscow airport.
What Did CBC’s Internal Memo Say?
According to the guidance, descriptions of the 2001 attacks should focus on the mechanics of the events, noting that “the hijackings led to passenger jet crashes in Washington, D.C., Pennsylvania and Manhattan,” and that the World Trade Center “was destroyed,” rather than labelling the attacks as terrorism outright.
The approach stands in contrast to how both the US and Canadian governments officially describe the events, with the FBI identifying the coordinated hijackings, which killed nearly 3,000 people, as the deadliest terrorist attacks in history, and Canada’s own government formally listing al-Qaeda as a terrorist entity responsible for the attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon.
How Has CBC Defended The Policy?
CBC Public Affairs Director Kerry Kelly defended the guidance, telling the Toronto Sun that the broadcaster’s long-standing approach reflects “a preference for the use of these words with attribution,” a practice she said was shared by many of the world’s leading journalistic organisations. CBC News editor-in-chief Brodie Fenlon had previously addressed the same policy in an October 2023 blog post, saying it had not changed and applied equally to coverage of 9/11.
Is This The First Time CBC’s Wording Has Sparked Controversy?
The row echoes a similar controversy that followed Hamas’s 7 October 2023 attack on Israel, when an internal CBC email reportedly instructed journalists not to refer to militants or Israeli soldiers as “terrorists,” instructing staff to frame the term as an attributed opinion rather than a factual description. That earlier episode had already drawn criticism from Conservative members of Canada’s Parliament, who demanded answers over the broadcaster’s editorial choices.
How Has The FBI Responded?
FBI Director Kash Patel issued a pointed warning to Canadian institutions over the policy, writing on social media that any Canadian agency that fails to publicly reject the CBC’s approach “will no longer have a friend in this FBI.” US Ambassador to Canada Pete Hoekstra amplified Patel’s comments, separately warning that failing to confront what he described as radical and terrorist ideologies risked undermining shared security cooperation between the two countries.
How Have Republican And Conservative Politicians Reacted?
The official social media account for US House Republicans questioned the broadcaster’s motives, asking, “What possible motive could there be for sanitising the worst terrorist attack on American soil?” Canadian Conservative MP Rachael Thomas accused the broadcaster of “choosing to redefine terrorism in a way that downplays the atrocity of 9/11,” while fellow Conservative MP Andrew Lawton called the policy “truly disgusting.”
The controversy has unfolded against a backdrop of heightened tension between Washington and Ottawa, after trade talks between the two countries broke down last week, prompting new tariffs on both sides and further straining the broader relationship between the two allies.
