June 20, 2025 – for immediate release

The National NewsMedia Council (NNC) has mediated and found that corrective action was taken to address a complaint about the accuracy of a December 4, 2024 opinion article published by the National Post.

The opinion article argued that widespread concerns of antisemitism among health-care practitioners across Canada has led many Jewish doctors to consider leaving Canada.

David Gray-Donald filed a two-part complaint with the NNC. The first part of the complaint argued that the photo included at the top of the opinion article was misattributed.

The second part of the complaint argued that the column contained specific inaccuracies related to a statement about protestors “blocking entrances to the building” during a February 2024 demonstration at Toronto’s Mount Sinai Hospital.

In his submission, the complainant provided evidence that the photographer credit should have been Anna Lippman, who was present at the demonstration, and not Melissa Lantsman, a Conservative Member of Parliament, who had reposted the photo on social media.

With regards to the specific concern about the accuracy of the statement, the complainant  argued that the entrance to the hospital had been closed for two hours before the demonstration took place. The complainant, moreover, argued that there was no evidence of protesters blocking the two open entrances to the hospital. The complainant provided references to his own account of the incident.

The news organization responded to the complainant’s two concerns. In response to the concern about the photo attribution, they noted the error had been corrected and that a new photo accompanied the column.

With regards to the complainant’s concern about the statement noting the hospital entrances were “blocked,” the news organization pointed to statements issued by the Toronto Police Service that referenced protestors “interfering with the operations of a hospital,” which, in plain language, explains the allegations that protesters were preventing access to the hospital. 

The news organization also pointed to media coverage that cited the federal government’s 2021 amendment to the Criminal Code in response to anti-vaccination protests that created new offences for intimidating health-care workers or obstructing access to health-care service for further context on their use of language.

As part of the mediation process, the complainant had the opportunity to address the news organization’s responses.

On the matter of photo attribution, the complainant said they appreciated the news organization replacing the original photo with new photo and credit but expressed disappointment that a correction was not issued.

On the matter of the accuracy of statements made in the opinion column, the complainant expressed disagreement with the news organization’s response to its reporting of events.

In particular, the complainant disputed the description of an entrance (or entrances) to a hospital being ‘blocked’ when, in their view, no one was prevented from using the entrance. The complainant, moreover, disputed the news organization’s reference to the criminal code amendment because no one was arrested during the demonstration.

In response to the complainant’s concerns, the news organization agreed to research the matter further. In subsequent correspondence, the news organization agreed that an error had been made. The news organization updated the story to reflect that a single entrance was ‘blocked,’ and the piece was accompanied by an editor’s note to indicate a change had been made.

In addressing the use of the word “blocked,” the news organization clarified that the language was used to suggest protesters were effectively ‘in the way’ of anyone who had attempted to approach the doors. The news organization acknowledged the complainant may have a different interpretation.

In reviewing the complainant’s two concerns, Council considered the material provided by parties as well as other widely-available materials.

With regards to the complainant’s concerns about the photo attribution, Council agreed that corrective action had been taken by the news organization to address the complainant’s concerns. While a new photo and cutline were published, Council did note, however, that a formal correction about the original photo was not published, which would be in line with best practices so that readers are aware of the reasons for updating or correcting previously published material.

With regards to the complainant’s concerns about the accuracy of statements made in the column, Council accepted the arguments of the news organization given the article in question was an opinion column. Council also appreciated the additional effort displayed by the news organization to investigate the complainant’s concerns in a comprehensive manner when brought to their attention.

At the same time, Council noted two recommendations to the news organization in order to avoid future complaints on similar issues.

First, it agreed that the news organization’s use of language in the column could have been more precise. The NNC has stated in previous decisions, for example, that language use should be precise and readers should always be left with no ambiguity on any events that have taken place.

Second, it agreed that journalistic best practices support the view that all updates and changes to editorial content should be clearly reflected.

Despite these notations, and in light of the steps taken to update the information in the article, Council agreed that corrective action had been taken to address the concerns of accuracy contained in this complaint.