Many of you are aware that I am fighting against media bias toward Israel by the CBC, the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, a country wide media platform that is paid for by all the taxpayers and is the only media outlet heard all over Canada.

I want my day in court. I want to speak before the CRTC commission (another taxpayer funded organization) and reveal the CBC bias, including that of the Ombudsman, Esther Enkin, to all of Canada. I need your help. I need you to flood these two people:     with emails demanding that I be heard. Please take the time to write a short note: Demanding that the CRTC hear my complaint before the full commission.


You don’t need to be Canadian. You need to be concerned about media bias against Israel.

Let’s do this in Canada and set up a template for all those around the world who wish to take their media to “Court” and the Court of Public Opinion is the most important.


Background Information

I did not accept the response by the CBC ombudsman to my complaint and took it to the CRTC. Below is the correspondence between the CRTC and Leo Adler, a lawyer who has taken this on pro-bono, and myself. You will see that the CRTC dismissed my complaint with hardly a reading.


Here is the original complaint to the CBC…/rel…/494-cbc-bias-is-unacceptable


Here are the letters regarding the CRTC

December 24 Dear Ms. Bederman:


Thank you for contacting us regarding your open file with the CRTC.

As your initial complaint to the CRTC raises a number of complicated and sensitive issues, CRTC staff needs the time required to do our due diligence. The Commision will respond to your on going issue in due course.


December 30 (Keep in mind there were only two working days between December 24 and December 30).


Re: CBC News Programming Complaint Dear Ms. Bederman:

This is in reference to the complaint that you filed with the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (the Commission) on 22 October 2014, concerning news coverage by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) and the performance of the CBC Ombudsman. Commission staff has undertaken a detailed review of all of the information on the file. The following is the Commission's staffs assessment of and conclusions with respect to your complaint.

In your complaint, you refer to a series of complaints to the CBC beginning on 25 July 2014, the 19 September 2014 response from Mr. Jack Nagler, Director of Journalistic Public Accountability and Engagement at CBC News, and Ms. Esther Enkin's review, as the CBC Ombudsman, of Mr. Nagler's response.

From the submitted information, it is clear that Mr. Nagler conducted a review of the issues you had raised and addressed each in sequence. On 23 September 2014, yousubmitted a letter to Ms. Esther Enkin, CBC Ombudsman, expressing disagreement with Mr. Nagler's assessment and requesting a review of Mr. Nagler's response. On 7 October 2014, the CBC Ombudsman published the results of her review on the CBC website.

Taken as a whole, Commission staff is of the view that the information on file demonstrates that CBC staff and the CBC Ombudsman have responded fully to the substance of your complaints, and from a Commission staffs view, undertook comprehensive reviews to come to their respective conclusions.

With respect to your request for a Commission review of Ms. Enkin's ability to continue on in the role of CBC Ombudsman, Commission staff would note that while the Commission has, by condition of licence, prescribed the processes to be followed by the CBC in selecting and removing the Ombudsman from office, responsibility for executing these processes rests solely with the CBC.


Here is the letter sent by Leo Adler

January 6, 2015
Nanao Kachi
Re: CBC News Programming Complaint

Diane Bederman has forwarded to me your email letter sent on December 30, 2014, a copy of which is enclosed herewith.
Let me start by saying that, unfortunately, your letter does not remotely address the heart and substance of Ms. Bederman's complaint.

In previous correspondence with the CRTC, namely, November 13 and again December 24,2014, it was pointed out that Ms. Bederman's complaint needs to be addressed by theCommission "which involves a more formal process". In that same letter of November 13, 2014, it was stated that because of the need to have a more formal process, the Commission was unableto provide a timetable of when the issue would be addressed. This, of course, is understandable.

The next note from the CRTC was an email sent December 24, at 17:07, by Patrick Desjardins.

Once again, it was reiterated that the complaint to the CRTC "raises a number of complicated and sensitive issues, CRTC staff needs the time required to do our due diligence. The Commission will respond to your ongoing issue in due course".
Considering that Thursday and Friday, December 25 and 26, 2014, were statutory holidays and that December 27 and 28, 2014 was the weekend, it came as a complete surprise to me that an email would be sent on December 30 at 16:18 with your response to Ms. Bederman. In other words, this "formal process, that had to consider complicated and sensitive issues" was suddenly completed on December 29 and part of December 30?

Leaving aside the issue of whether or not Ms. Enkin ought to continue in the role of CBC Ombudsman — it being agreed that this is something that wrests within the ambit of the CBC — there is nothing in your letter that deals with the complaint of the systematic bias and failure of the CBC to properly and fairly cover the Israel/Palestinian issue.

Accordingly, I ask that you please provide me with the following:
a. How does one appeal your "decision"?
b. What is the CRTC policy and standard for reviewing complaints about the CBC, and where can one find such explanation?
c. I wish to be provided with, as was pointed out by the staff, the actual analysis of this complaint which "raises a number of complicated and sensitive issues".
In sum, your letter simply says the CBC conducted a review of Ms. Bederman's complaint. Of course they conducted a review, the problem is that review was inappropriate, insufficient and lacking in due process. Your confirmation that the CBC conducted a review is hardly the answer to the questions raised.
I look forward to hearing from you and I look forward to Ms. Bederman's complaint being dealt with appropriately and fairly, and with due diligence.


The response from the CRTC
January 16 RE; CBC News Programming—Complaint of Ms. Diane Bederman

Dear Mr. Adler;
This letter is in response to your correspondence of 6 January 2015 on behalf of Ms. Diane Bederman. In your letter you pose several questions concerning the response of Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Cornmission (CRTC) staff to the complaint filed with the CRTC by Ms. Bederman on 22 October 2014. I have read your letter with interest and can offer the following comments in reply,would note that the letter sent to Ms. Bederman on 30 December 2014 and signed by me does represent a decision of the CRTC—that is, a decision of the Commission itself. Rather, that letter communicates the conclusions Of CRTC staff after having conducted a review of Ms. Bederman's complaint and the related materials on file,
In accordance with its standard practices, staff reviews broadcasting complaints from members of the public. Staffs goal is to identify the forum in which the complaint could be most appropriately treated, if any, and to forward the complaint accordingly. For instance, in the case of many private broadcasters, the Canadian Broadcast Standards' Council is the most appropriate body to consider complaints. In the case of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC), and more specifically in the case of the CBC's news services, the CBC Ombudsman will often be best suited to adjudicate the complaint.

In the present case, staff communicated the preliminary view that the complaint might require a Commission determination. However, after a full review of the file, staff concluded that this complaint should not be forwarded to the Commission for decision. This formed the essence of the letter of 30 December 2014.

This conclusion was based on the fact that a CBC News employee and the CBC Ombudsman had both reviewed Ms. Bederman's complaint, Which in staffs view dealt with the substance of the complaint. The consideration that the subsequent complaint to the CRTC did not raise any additional relevant issues also led staff to its ultimate position.

If, as it appears is the case, Ms. Bederman is not satisfied with staffs assessment. she may request that the Commission determine the issue of whether or not her complaint is to be considered further. If Ms, Bederman were to make a further request related to her complaintshe may follow the procedure relating to complaints set out in the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission Rules of Practice and Procedure.

The CRTC maintains a web service through which members of the public may make filings related to complaints. This tool can be found at the following address:

If the Commission were to consider Ms. Bederman's complaint it would assess whether the licensee that is the subject of the complaint had broadcast anything in confravention of applicable regulations or conditions of licence. As Ms. Bederman's complaint appears tofocus mainly on the broadcasts of CBC Radio I, she may wish to refer to the Radio Regulations, 1986. 2SORf2010-277


May I say, more regulations. More hoops. Anything to prevent a complaint from going forward.