March 3, 2026 – for immediate release

The National NewsMedia Council (NNC) has considered and dismissed with reservation one part of a complaint about accuracy and dismissed another part of the complaint about language use in a May 25, 2025 opinion column published by the Toronto Sun.

The opinion article argued that a demonstrator wearing an item resembling a “hand grenade” was “yet another example” of how protestors are “given so much leeway in Toronto.”

An individual by the name of Anita Anand filed a complaint stating concern that the article’s premise relied on a “spurious claim” about an object that was “obviously a keychain,” rather than a weapon, in order to incite hatred.

The complainant also expressed concern about the opinion piece’s question: “And perhaps more poignant is why are people permitted to wear disguises, display potential lethal weapons, or partake in terrorist cosplay and not receive the same response that you would see if it was done by a Freedom Convoy trucker or a defying owner of a barbecue restaurant?”

The complainant argued that the use of the phrase “terrorist cosplay” along with the piece’s use of images portraying an individual wearing a keffiyeh “creates a deeply troubling association” that links symbols of Palestinian identity with terrorism, and suggests that individuals wearing the headdress should be stopped by police.

In response to the concern about the column’s characterization of the item as undetermined, the news organization explained that there was no attempt to verify the nature of the object, as the police did not appear to have investigated the item in the first place.

In response to the concern about the use of the term “terrorist cosplay,” the news organization stated that it was the opinion of the columnist based on the fact that an individual was “dressed like this and openly displaying an item resembling a grenade, and knowing they are attending a pro-Israel event.”

An ordinary reading of the column in question offers a criticism of the individual’s choice to bring an item resembling a hand grenade to a counterprotest, and the apparent lack of response by law enforcement to investigate. The piece also highlights what the columnist perceives to be a double standard in how protestors are treated depending on the issues they support.

It is not the role of the NNC to decide the specific subjects of opinion writing. Editorial prerogative allows opinion writers and editors to choose the focus and scope of their stories, which includes deciding the specific arguments and topics of commentary.

While the NNC understands that some opinions may be objectionable or unwelcome, a diversity of opinions is a vital component of a free and democratic society. Further, opinion pieces are distinct from news reporting and may incorporate a range of stylistic or rhetorical devices to convey their argument.

That said, regardless of the opinion writer’s focus and perspective on an issue, the NNC has long-stated that the opinion must be grounded in fact. This includes taking steps, where possible, to confirm the accuracy of the information that forms the basis of an opinion. It was with this focus on verifiable fact that the NNC undertook its review and deliberations.

In reviewing the complaint, the NNC observed that the opening sentence of the opinion piece states that the demonstration included “one pro-Hamas supporter with a hand grenade.” In this way, the opinion piece matter-of-factly describes the item in question as a weapon.

At the same time, the column’s headline, along with other statements, express to readers the uncertainty around the nature of the item. The opinion piece states, for example, “It’s still undetermined if it was real or fake.” The opinion piece also includes multiple images for readers to draw their own conclusions about the authenticity of the item.

In its deliberation, Council considered the ability and expectation for the news organization to verify the nature of the item in question and law enforcement’s response to the perceived threat prior to the column’s publication. In this case, the news organization did not disclose any steps to independently verify the item in question prior to publication.

In its deliberation of the matter, Council also considered the different levels of verification expected for a piece of reported news compared to an opinion article. Council agreed that news pieces report new and verified facts to readers, while opinion pieces frequently comment on recently reported facts and other widely-available information. That said, as a matter of general principle, when introducing new information to support an argument, attempts should be made to verify facts.

In its discussion, Council expressed divergent views on the expectation that opinion writers should independently verify information included in a column prior to its publication. On one hand, Council raised concerns that presenting a situation as unverified, and unverifiable, when no attempt was made to verify it, falls short of best practices. On the other hand, Council noted that the uncertainty of the item was clearly communicated to readers on several occasions in the column, despite it being referred to as a weapon in the first sentence.

In this case, Council noted that the uncertainty about the nature of a possibly dangerous item was a key point in the column. Council also discussed the role that rhetorical devices, including hyperbole, play in commentary, although the news organization did not state in its exchanges that it intended to employ such rhetorical devices in the column.

While Council recognized that the column acknowledged the uncertainty around what may have appeared in the moment to be a dangerous item at a counterdemonstration, Council members also noted the importance of taking basic steps to verify facts prior to publication.

At the crux of these deliberations was an attempt to balance the need to safeguard the wide latitude, range of topics, and stylistic approaches to opinion writing along with the risk of using disclaimers about verifiability to justify forming and presenting opinions based on speculation.

On balance, then, Council dismissed the complaint about accuracy with the reservation that opinion columns ought to be based on verifiable fact.

With regards to the use of the language “terrorist cosplay,” Council considered this to be the opinion of the columnist based on the presence of the item in question, and agreed that it falls within the latitude of opinion writers to decide on word choice. Council did not find grounds in this case to support the allegation that the column calls for law enforcement action against individuals wearing keffiyehs. Importantly, the NNC has consistently supported opinion writers’ prerogative over word choice and the ability to use strong language to express their views. For these reasons, Council dismissed the complaint about language use.