A leaked memo says Canada’s public broadcaster told staff not to call 9/11 a “terrorist attack,” reviving a long-running fight over media language and trust.
Story Snapshot
- An internal note reportedly reiterates the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation’s caution on using “terrorist.”
- CBC’s public guide already prefers “the Sept. 11 attacks” and urges attribution for charged terms.
- CBC says the rule aims to avoid appearing to take sides and to ensure consistency.
- Older CBC pages described 9/11 as “terrorist attacks,” showing a shift in style over time.
What the Memo Reportedly Said
New reporting says the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation circulated a memo ahead of the twenty-fifth anniversary of September 11. The memo told staff not to call 9/11 a “terrorist attack” in their own voice. Coverage should instead use phrases like “the Sept. 11 attacks.” The report cites an internal communication attributed to a senior standards editor. CBC did not publish the memo itself, but the claim matches language in its known newsroom guidance from 2023.
CBC’s published note on word choice explains why editors flag the term. The guide urges “extreme caution” with “terrorist” and “terrorism.” It says reporters should generally avoid labeling a specific attack a “terrorist act” unless the word is in a quote or a clip. The same policy applies to 9/11, which the guide says CBC prefers to call “the Sept. 11 attacks” or similar wording. The goal is consistent, neutral language across stories.
How CBC Defends Its Approach
In 2023 committee testimony and coverage, CBC leaders argued the policy is about fairness, not any single conflict. They said reporters can air the words “terrorist” and “terrorism” when a source says them. But staff should avoid adopting the labels themselves because audiences may see that as taking sides. CBC framed this as a longstanding newsroom standard to avoid endless fights over consistency and impartiality across global events.
The policy sets a working definition too. CBC’s explanation says terrorism generally means attacks on unarmed civilians for political, religious, or other ideological reasons. Even so, editors warn the term is often contested, which can derail reporting. By leaning on plain descriptions of who did what, where, and how, without labels in the reporter’s voice, CBC says it reduces confusion and bias claims in fast-moving coverage.
Why Critics See a Problem
Critics say this guidance bends common sense and hides moral clarity. They argue that avoiding the word “terrorist” for 9/11 feels like word games that insult victims and dull the truth. They also point to older CBC pages that called 9/11 “the terrorist attacks that rocked the United States,” and a program guide that used similar language, as proof the broadcaster once spoke plainly and has since retreated into euphemism. The archived phrasing is public and easy to find.
🚨 let me tell you what the CBC just did because this one is genuinely insane..
the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation just sent a memo to all journalists ahead of the 25th anniversary of 9/11.. bold, italicized, emphasis on every word..
"Do not refer to the Sept. 11 attacks as… https://t.co/Sxq2uK14wL pic.twitter.com/RKfZd0MkPr
— Tuki (@TukiFromKL) August 27, 2026
The clash taps into a wider worry shared on the right and left: powerful institutions change rules and language without asking the public. Many citizens already think major media protect elites and silence plain talk. A style rule that bans common words, even in the name of neutrality, looks like that trend. Supporters call it evenhanded journalism. Skeptics call it spin that erodes trust. Both sides agree words carry weight, especially on events that shape national memory.
What This Means for Readers
For audiences, two facts can be true at once. First, clear descriptions of actions help people grasp events without hype. Second, some labels are accurate and widely understood by the public. When newsrooms avoid those labels, they should explain why in plain terms. Transparency can lower anger and guesswork. If an outlet relies on quotes for charged words, it should include them when relevant and show who said what, so readers can judge the claims for themselves.
Sources:
lifesitenews.com, linkedin.com, cbc.ca
